Learning to Look/Looking at Learning || Constructivism and Connection Making in Art Education

National Art Education Association

Constructivism and Connection Making in Art EducationAuthor(s): Judith SimsponSource: Art Education, Vol. 49, No. 1, Learning to Look/Looking at Learning (Jan., 1996), pp.53-59Published by: National Art Education AssociationStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3193579 .

Accessed: 16/06/2014 12:00

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

National Art Education Association is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to ArtEducation.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 194.29.185.109 on Mon, 16 Jun 2014 12:00:32 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=naea

http://www.jstor.org/stable/3193579?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


*. ~ ? ,. . ~.. . . .?..== = o . .. ..

.-'/

,S; U~~~~~. , / . ~~~~~f'

/ Con stutivU1i sm. ad Conao . a n OH' lB~~~~~~~~~-

?el ? Im ? ~ Im ?~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~.

II*. IN / s-.,

Ia I .,

ea e ^

IaIa '*

IaI a0

II

n ArtAs Experience (1934), Dewey went to great lengths to make the case for shared or "common substance" between aesthetics

and other subjects. He argued that rather than seeing different cultural subjects and functions as isolated, discrete, and inherently distinct, they should be seen from a common vantage point. Considering subject matter interrelatedly extends individual social and cognitive growth within each experience.

Dewey also discussed the

transference of certain attitudes and functions from one domain to another. For example, something experienced or learned in one context may affect the level of understanding or acceptance of that idea in another. If we accept Dewey's definition of an experience as a result of the engagement of one's natural feelings and energies with one's physiological sensory-motor response and, further, allow his idea regarding transference to hold, we can readily make the connection between constructivist theory, an approach

based on the notion that the individual actively builds and adapts experiences into a world view, and art education. Dewey saw art as a series of interactions between organism and environment, an experience that involves the whole creature. Dewey (1938), Froebel (1887), and others posit that curriculum that relates to the learner's experiences enhances understanding, while acknowledging the possibility of more than one way of knowing.

Constructivism emphasizes the

BY JUDITH SIMSPON

JANUARY 1996 / ART EDUCATION

.

0*.

0*.

*0O

.

O.



Teaching students to

view art as a

contextual whole

involves teaching

them to find meaning

through their own as

well as others' work.

i:xperile ce ofth :' earner s integra o .... the making of meaing aid problemr

solving. The social, emotional and cognitive experiences a child brings to the classroom are considered part of the learning process. The developmental level of students embodies social, emotional, and cognitive experiences as well as genetically predetermined physical factors. According to Vygotsky (1978), there is a vital connection to be made between children's actual developmental level and their level of potential development. Called the "zone of proximal development," the bridge between where the student is and where s/he is going is in the hands of the educator. Constructivists believe that bridge must be one that encourages the student to build meaning throughout the crossing.

Clearly, the importance of the learner's experiences is of concern to constructivists, just as it was to Dewey. Structurally, progressive education is predicated on the notion that:

...the foundation for learning is rooted in the children's thinking and an understanding of how different that can be. (Montag, 1991, p. 5)

Although the theories may differ in applied method and underlying philosophy, the intent of both Dewey's E E i . .............

............

(1969) p:-gresve theory and that of the Eons iuctivists is to provide leanling iituati.ois that connect new . .. . . . ...

infor6mation:i: ': tho :e student's base of

experiencelis^^....I. The main strategy in constructivist

planning is to connect information to the child in as many ways as are possible. Brooks and Brooks (1993), address the notion that learning is not simply discovery but also interpretation

c nforFnation ftiough new .. 'amewor s or s-ructures. This is best"':.... accomplished through linkage oftdeas . and active involvement on the part of '."i the learner.

Artrooms are full of opportunities to implement these linkages. Teaching children about the meaning of art and artists is making connections and linking ideas about art to their personal worlds and, often, to other academic subjects through verbal and visual expression. Talking about what we see, encouraging students to become involved in "reading" paintings helps to stimulate the transition from surface understandings about artwork to personal identification with it. Helping children to identify with the content of a work by having them view it through their own lens, rather than simply telling them biographical or technical information, affords important discoveries that are building blocks toward knowing. Encouraging students to reveal new understandings through personal visual expression adds another dimension to the interpretation of meaning. Using the students' experiential base; building on that base through the introduction of a different perspective of a concept; and, allowing the two sources of information to come together through art-like behavior provides a strong verbal/visual synthesis. Art sheds its mystique and is revealed as integrally part of the world.

Lowenfeld, in the second edition of Creative and Mental Growth (1952), addressed the concept that true appreciation of a child's work takes place through one's own ability to identify with the child's "relationship to his experience." Respect for a child's drawing necessitates realizing that children draw what they know, not what adults expect them to know or to see. He relates this phenomenon to

ART EDUCATION / JANUARY 1 996



teaching children about artists' work as well. He states:

What has been said for the appreciation of the child's creative work is basically true also for the appreciation of great works of art. In bringing them closer to the child we have to know that we must first of all make it possible for the child to identify himself with the relationship the artist has had to his subject matter. It is, therefore, of little value for the appreciation of a work of art simply to determine the content of it...By trying to identify ourselves with the intentions of the artist we shall come closer to understanding and appreciation of his work. (p.18)

Art education has a long history of "child-centered" thinking, based on the writings of Rousseau, Froebel, Lowenfeld and others. It is not my intent to imply that the Romantic paradigm, Dewey's progressive movement, and constructivism are interdependent, but rather to establish that there is a common stream that runs throughout them all. That stream is the importance of the role of the student's experiences. In our concern about teaching lessons with strong art content, we sometimes forget the rewards inherent in tapping into the learner's existing cognitive and affective domains. Student-centered curriculum embodies both the progressive and constructivist principles of active, participatory learning and exploration.

In the artroom, creating environments where children are encouraged, through verbal and visua explorations, to relate artists' work to their own worlds reinforces the meaning of art in life. Meaningful connections also aid in understanding

similar phenomena outside of the art discipline. An example of such a connection would be Henry Moore or Kathe Kollwitz drawings of the horrors of living in Europe during major world wars. Visiting such images; hearing the music of the times; reading historical and fictional accounts of the terror experienced by people living in subways or interned; and, recalling the worthlessness of monetary wealth in once prosperous countries cannot but add to the meaning of the artist's work and to stronger understandings of those periods in time. Curriculum that minimizes what the makers intended or what their work may have meant does not promote understanding. Curriculum that guides students toward knowing the meaning of art explores the relationships between object, content, context and the world of the maker and associates those relationships with the world of the viewers.

Ellen Dissanayake (1988) believes that context is essential to meaning. The importance of the context surrounding information is part of a constructivist stance. Dissanayake talks of contexts in terms of settings, time in history, events, and personal purposes for the making of art. She speaks of art as "making special." This notion implies the depth of personal involvement that occurs in the art of creating somethin. It also strer-tens-:, the pos ion for the ee|d for stuceits to

.. . . . ',?,i',:',:'~i '~:',i:~ii~i~ '~::i::. ,, ... . ........ be "me.aers." In my view, teaclWg stuce-rs to view art tas a contexal

ii: E

E: i?: i E: : :

i::i E: i::!i:::: :

i ::E :ii i..i i. E iE

who.e involves teacrip g theming ind mewaii throughtleir own aswe L.as others':worki. Dslgning units and lessons that tap into the learner's reservoir of thoughts and feelings does this. Bringing thoughts about art and

art-like action together in a curriculum increases students' awareness that art is a responsive act not limited to a great "Aha!" reaction to the universe, but may also be a deliberate result of the desire to express or communicate an idea.

It is possible to teach toward these understandings without getting into an emotional/cognitive conflict and without provoking conflicting paradigmatic issues. First, one must realize the need to provide environments where students can make connections and to consequently make curricula choices that keep students at the center of curriculum design. Once the choice is made to begin planning lessons that connect art and the learner's world, to build bridges for learners, sound lessons just naturally occur in the artroom. Teachers may also become better prepared for strong organizational collaboration with interdisciplinary teams.

Why else should art teachers make such choices? Beyond the fact that current mainstream thinking in education is based on constructivist ideas, there are several other concrete reasons to consider student-centered curriculum. With the publication of Howard Garcher's (1983), Robert

.. .. ............ Stermberg's |1 85), and Caine and Caine's (1991) work regarding multiple

t .. .... ........ ..... . .

-ir.telligences - :: connecons in the nd, resear: -exisS tB support the

fath at chil :-,i :e many ways. Stu:ents can ::

i:-i t:to passively

simultaneously throu gh doing.: They can be taught how to think metaphorically, how to dance a painting and how to paint the flight of a




bug. Lakoff and Johnson (1980) believe people process ideas metaphorically. The authors contend that we "clster" coneppts and gain.unde-rstandig of the [lew bypfirding sic fraes of eference hro gh whicl o -o

structure/process new AiougF|. s. Fiaes of reference eare he reslts of:i.... experiences. Children who react to the challenges presented when confronting new information by asking 'Why is this so?", exploring many possible answers, learn far more than those who simply accept facts, figures and other data about anything. In the artroom, we constantly challenge students to solve visual problems. Teaching children about artwork without encouraging them to make personal connections to it, however, is not teaching toward knowing. Making things that are seemingly related only to a world of fine art that is outside life is meaningless. When the student's understanding of art is locked within the domain of formalist instruction, artistic and problem solving skills may be developed, but the power to use them in new ways is crippled and does not transfer between academic disciplines.

WAYS OF CONNECTION MAKING IN THE ARTROOM

What are some concrete examples of connection making?

In training preservice teachers, I teach that one way of strategizing student-centered curricula design is to choose a theme around which to build a unit of instruction. To avoid either too shallow or too broadly based thematic planning, we practice looking at various images with content connections familiar to students. For example, we might look at Judy Chicago's Dinner Party, Meret Oppenheim's Object, Claes Oldenburg's Floor Cone,

Leonardo Di Vinci's The Last Supper, Richard Estes' Double SelfPortrait and Edward Hopper's Nighthawks. We b-gin wi the?blatantly para:nt g

re ated il some way to fod and tf-at all i ~ e n:an.E ... .i ..... i .. . suJdents an conre i ctthat s i Yect.

W.e lookfor simi|-ities aA :id I I--: dissimilarities among theiart wois. There are no people in thre te images, there are no people seated at the table/counter in two cases but there are people in two others. Two of the images are single objects, an ice cream cone that does not look edible and a teacup that no one would wish to drink from; three of the images are three-dimensional objects; there are lunch counters in two of the paintings, etc.

We then look for clear separations between the works. An obvious one is time-related. It is clear that The Last Supper, as it was painted by Di Vinci, is not about a contemporary event, whereas there is no reason to think all the other images could not be related to the present. As the dialog progresses, differences become more difficult to find and require more personalized responses, conjectures arrived at through lived experiences. Continued looking for clues informs ideas and links them to prior idiosyncratic associations. A person may point out that the place settings at the table in Da Vinci's painting were probably not reflective of the individuals seated at them, where all those at the Dinner Party were characteristic of the absent people. Such an observation may open the door for group inquiry. The differences between the two place settings could lead to questions about which of those situations is the more

common; why; who chooses; what if your table looked like Chicago's, could you tell who should sit where? Talk could ensue about the political and social issues that led to the making of the ceramic Dinner Party and those that led to painting the Last Supper.

Brainstorming lesson ideas results from the classroom discussion. Elementary students may make a clay meal for storybook characters. Pre- adolescents might be asked to design a place setting for a hero. At the adolescent level, research could be assigned that would lead to assembling information about world issues and events that were occurring when each of the works discussed were created. This information could then be utilized in a studio project designed to reflect a current, parallel issue or event.

Qualities, like loneliness, that appear to be common to all the works but conveyed very differently in each, could also provoke a series of lessons related to language, music or philosophy. Talk about what the artists have done to invite the viewers into or to keep them mentally outside the two- dimensional works might be addressed. Looking at the surfaces of the three-dimensional pieces and the reactions they provoke; examining the paintings in terms of light and shadow and the times of day; talking and writing about what it would be like if you were there; have you ever been in a similar situation; have you ever seen a piece of food that looked repulsive; if you jumped on that ice cream what might happen are all ways of involving the student in active discussion about the artwork from a framework they comprehend. Connections begin to be made between the real world and that of the artist; between artwork, students and the power of visual expression.

How does this type of talking about

ART EDUCATION / JANUARY 1996



art become incorporated into a series of lessons? There is no doubt that just the six images discussed could form the basis for a unit on any number of themes. Gatherings, food-spaces, places and faces to name few. Within the themes, lessons about creating one's own place setting; a group dining table and chairs with a protest motif; a dinner party with a personality; a giant spectacle of futuristic food; the dinner no one would eat in the place no one would go all come to mind for the artroom and spark many ideas for other disciplines. Students could help decide which of the above visual projects to do or an installation could result in doing several combined activities. All the school art materials, techniques and elements of principles of design are included in the making of any of these products.

The criteria for product making is another choice the teacher makes. The clarity of expectations is the teacher's responsibility and criteria would naturally vary considerably from setting to setting, according to age appropriateness and student needs.

WAYS .O, ,ONNE TING A,li-I 0 THE IS Ii OFTHE C:URRICULUM

The pement:t 'o ' .''of constrgilvist curriculum is ofe"i:': Linked t' itegrated th atic i::nis of .earning asstihis:ciplines.f I't teachers are sometimes part of the planning of such units as members of TI (theme immersion) teams (Manning, Manning, Long, 1994). In elementary and middle schools where this approach is practiced, lessons are planned that use art as a learning tool, a way of processing information that affords personal expression just as writing does. The art teacher functions in many different roles in this kind of curriculum. Unlike the isolated,

marginal position an has :0cciedi the past (Greene, 1991) in integrated or TI programs art is at the center along with all other disciplines. The art educator is expected to work cooperatively to reinforce knowledge gained through reading, writing, questioning, movement, music, dramatization, and work across disciplines to weave a cohesive thread of understanding. Practice such as this requires that the art teacher have an understanding of the cognitive, social, physical, psychological, personal and environmental development of students. An art teacher needs to know how to work cooperatively and how to make connections between art and other disciplines. It may also be necessary for the teacher to become a researcher in order to find the best media and appropriate activities to satisfy the objectives within the conceptual unit.

Choosing content that truly lends new insights to the material being studied is also a purpose of interdisciplinary curricula plans. Beyond acquisition of skills and -einforcement ofidas, an canobe .nTj link to Orpaginatv"i': ''''"-' ;terpretatic- of ideas; te cobncrete

seeing" ofa|ttemrs; the vsial mbolic riessage necessay to cemer_

concept o ::o push it to deeper eaning. T theory of synctics is

employed when one thing suggests another and students view any concept from a variety of angles. Support for such connection making has a strong advocacy among contemporary educators, is the focus of educational conferences, and telegraphs a strong message to art educators to use what we know in more productive ways.

Becoming sensitive to

what learners know

from experience, and

what they bring with

them to art class is

invaluable to

teachers.


Deeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee???eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee$eeeeee~eee~ eeeee'..e~::e:~.:b.eeeeeeeee~:~.eeeeeeeee~eeeee..:.~:...eeeeeeeeeeeee..~`..eeeeeeee .eeeeeeeeeee~eeee

?ii * :E:i:i:::i::~~ ~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~......... :::::::::::: ......

.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~"iiiiiiiiiiiii ..... .......

? i

: i .

. ;;;

: . . .?? ?? ? ?? ?? ?



SOME RESULTS OF CONNECTION MAKI :JG

What can a teacher exect? HOi can one judge the effect of connecii..

making and student-cer eed, constructivist, planning? Those who have tried these strategies will attest to the fact that the first thing that happens is students are eager to get involved in knowing about art, artmaking and learning technical processes. Fewer students will say "I can't think of anything" or "what is it you want us to do." A learning atmosphere has been provided that is conducive to looking inside oneself for answers. The variety of interpretations, the understanding gained about the artworks, the nature of an open-ended discussion, all lend themselves toward helping students accept their own ideas as valid. Talking about how different artists conveyed the same concept in different ways, about things seen and things imagined, and setting up problems that have multiple solutions all make students comfortable about formulating new ideas and creating new things.

Becoming sensitive to what learners know from experience, and what they bring with them to art class is invaluable to teachers. Teachers with this information about their students can make planning choices that will allow all students to participate fully in a lesson. The idiosyncratic rature of learners can be exploited i the artroomrath|erthane co sidcdI a z';'~ n a g':e a al .- !o blem:.i. i . :'::::;: . zi~'i.......... ............. .Xmanageenal pobDlem. .. :i.. ? ; Asse':ing a.nd evLAatir: the-ez dteptl .:............ ... ... z:::z:z: -.:z: z . z zz ...:::: : : - ... . ..... . - . . z z z i : : ..

ofSai dent's od e edge and abiliy to produce an object becomes a student/teacher effort in constructivist learning climates. The students should be able to examine a set of clearly defined criteria and respond as to their

ow :- ility to ffeet them. BSidents w E Z, EZhi ; iW _-; ?.. i~ i~ii .5 i ............:

ha:v: een help.edi. oi Ie cinnectios between themn selves and ie problems th a-re askei i:o solve,, w D| also have

technical or other criteria, are able to fairly examine their own and others' work in light of those criteria. Even very young children have been known to accomplish this successfully.

Proponents of constructivist thinking claim students gain understanding from participating in evaluating their own work. Portfolios are now being used throughout the curriculum. Measuring one's progress is accomplished by personal, peer and teacher review. Files of work with clear objectives to be met are saved and reviewed regularly as concepts are mastered and tasks become more complex with such mastery. Oddly enough, portfolios have been artist's critical files for years! They have been utilized to review past work and as measures of professional growth. Using portfolios in the artroom, for more than storage purposes, allows both teachers and students to reflect on and constantly review work over time toward those same ends.

Individuals can be asked to speak about or write about their work, revealing the pattern of connections made from one task to another or from one subject area to another. Having students revisit works used in a -lliaMonal :scusson prior to doing

. . . ..... . . . . . . . .... . ....

eir arworlkand/oiexamin e other .-anniri stucies, sucn as sketches, can -eveal tHe level:s-:uii:fu erstanding that

have been achived. i ^lrough the artmaking process. Instead of being judged as one among many, a person's

............ work is evaluated acc'.ding to individi :progress. :Sch a pro:e ure does seveal positive-i':ngs. It i: alleviate-l ear of faili -l, of being measure aagainst the. ass "arfts or perceived peer "brain." It validates the notion that everyone is capable of having good ideas and developing acceptable levels of technical skills to allow visual expression to be an alternative or complement to verbal expression. It affords original thought and action the opportunity to be valued. Not having to compete unfairly, having options to problem solving offered through student-centered lesson planning, and having to face the reality that the responsibility for demonstrating learning is in the hands of the learner are all ways of developing thinking people who have processed new ideas according to their abilities, preferences and experiences.

None of these evaluative measures can be employed without the proper connections being made between teachers and students regarding content, skills and levels of expectation. Knowing one's students; considering how to carefully guide them through that "zone of proximal development", also known as the path of understanding; connecting what has been decided that students need to know with what they already do know; and helping them to want to know more is what the constructivist teacher does. Art educators just happen to have a very rich content data base and many philosophical and pedagogical strategies from which to make choices. Perhaps applying constructivist theory is one of the instructional choices we should seriously consider. It may provide a needed foundation for

ART EDUCATION / JANUARY 1996



ursm 0in n

)ecoming -itically inv: ved in ir terdisc-iiinary planni within our schools a C add mean- g to our work in Bie artroo. :z.: 1, l

Judith Simpson, Ph.D, llis'Assistant Professo r. Dpartment -rt Education, SUNYCollW 'ai.'falo.

Over 70 books of authentic multicultural de-

signs, all copyright-free, from African, Native American, South American, European, Near Eastern and Far Eastern indigenous cultures.

Send $2.00 for the illustrated Fall/Winter 19951 1996 catalogue, with many money-saving offers.

Stemmer House Publishers, Inc., Department AE, 2627 Caves Road, Owings Mills, MD 21117-2919

I~~~ II iii ---- I III IIIII

REFERENCES Brooks, J.G., & Brooks, M.G. (1993). In search

ofunderstanding: The case for constructivist classrooms. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Caine, R.N., & Caine, G. (1991). Making connections: Teaching and the human brain. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

Dewey, J. (1934). Art as experience. New York: Perigree.

Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. New York: Macmillan.

Dewey, J. (1969). Results of child study applied to education. InJ. Boydston (Ed.), The early works (vol.5). Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.

Disssanayake, E. (1988). What is artfor? Seattle: University of Washington.

Froebel, F. (1887). The education ofman. New York: D. Appleton and Co.

Gardner, H. (1983). Frames ofmind. New York: Basic Books.

Greene, M. (1991). Texts and margins. Harvard Educational Review, 61 (1), 27-39.

Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago: University of Chicago.

Lowenfeld, V. (1952). Creative and mental growth (Rev. ed). New York: Macmillan.

Manning, M., Manning, G., & Long, R. (1994). Theme immersion: Inquiry-based curriculum in elementary and middle schools. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Montag, C. (1991). Introduction, Class values. In K. Jervis and C. Montag (Eds.), Progressive education for the 1990's: Transforming practice. New York: Teachers College Press.

Sternberg, R.J. (1985). Beyond I.Q: A triarchic theory of intelligence. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Vygotsky, L.S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher order psychological processes. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

.

UNITEDSTATES POSTAL SERVICE,.

Statement of Ownership, Management, and Circulation (Required by 39 U.S.C. 3685)

1. PuaicaonaTh T . Pualiction . 3. Fiig Oas

Art Education [o10|3121 61 01 November 17,1995 4. WoM Frquency 5. No. o lsui Pahu 6. Ann Suacrnppon Prt

Annualy Bi-Monthly-Jan, March, May, July, Sept., Nov. 6 $50.00

7. Comt Ming Adres* ot Known Olc ofe Pubai on (StI. Cty CounX $nM. nd ZP.4) (Nmo Pinn

National Art Education Association, 1916 Association Drve, Reston, Virginia 22091-1590 Compl. Mliag Add3n3s o He dquaD or Gmt ainOK .Offilc o Pubne, (pNotPri,t,

National Art Education Association, 1916 Association Drive, Reston, Virginia 22091-1590 9. Fu Namu arnd Cor:plte MkNing A Nddas of Pubik,. E.r,an MMulng Edlor Do Nom L.w SOJl Puatw FNw md CnpQnpr MSMr. A*dr)

National Art Education Association, 1916 Association Drive, Reston, Virginia 22091-1590 Editor (NM CoWa W Mt Ads)

Dr. Ronald N. MacGregor, Department of Curriculum Studies, The University of British Columbia, Facuty of Education, 2121 Main Mall, Vancouver, B.C. Canada V6T 1Z4

MWgph Edt- (Nkand Cafn- MWui Add*ss

Stacie Lyn Lequar 1916Association Drive, Reston, Virginia 22091-1590

10. Ownl .at em o dy a c ipwatn, i nurnmd vsmeustml stdom l at amr e.y bmaftf I nm.e and addrs.es of jstocfr e o w todnsg pct or morf otp l tnci w.a If a not o auwnodbyapoon , rwefma d ad*assses o*srf .t "'/i mSw -o'ra aw be o d ein. f .oM>dyayparmrernpor oErn ~m p d am en ddd a w aas tthe oTi each k*rm r De It bw thg e spubon apis p~hed by n,, nonmWt orgta. R nr wuK da u mSt b f sald.) (Do No Lsv Blank.f

Ful Nnlr Comptlet Mailing Addrtll

National Art Education Association 1916 Association Drive, Reston, Virginia 22901-159

(Non-Profit Organization)

11. Knmown 5Bmdtld, Mortgagm, and Oter SUwl y HolM wnorHolding PCrin M Mor of Toba Amouit of Baodsi . Motnpges. Omr Securflu. If noa. dhac hm. 0 Not

Fun Naun Complet Mallng Addren

12. For complndon by nonprofotrionst oaiio uwized to mai t Ped Pa ntnw. Th pupmO. .fmUian, and nloroffit ctu of tih orginian nd h ftxotrt laun.r td Inlineoma tux purpous: (Ckt aon) b Hu Not Changsd Durng Pncidng 12 Monw

a Hu Chaned During Preding 12 Monmh pcfdd, pulten fn=t su?nr xpten * r nang Hlo n dih mt lNnatr

13. Pubbcaion NMan 14. mIu Dal for CiaPtotion Oa o3ow

Art Education September 1995 ,15. ltn and KAF OfiC.tBi Avwmg cai Coplm Each Inum Aetual Na. Copis of Single l*ssu

OAxtig Peedndlng 12 Months Publlshd NMeru to Fing Od

.. oWr No. C4pi.s (Nt Pre Ai) 17,013 16,937

I. Pud aor Aquastod Circuladon (1) Sale Through Oleaers and C.wrin. Sbvt Vendon. Counr Sad

(NotrMisd 12 1i (2 PS or Reqwuesd Mai Sulbscrpton ncide AdvW "'Aof C4* 16 655 16 54L

c. Taw Paid andtor Rftequ Ccui (Sumi lofrm) An mb2) 16.667 16.542

d. Fr- Dsitbudn by MW

J(Sst s,Ca niay. aIdfWAw) J69 14?

. Fw i bufdon Oumdr t MO (C&.rren or Ot w Mom- 0 0

t aW

F

Dibucn o (Sumn

f 5

5 d 69 142

ar Ttalw Disbulod(SLmsiWi n dc1 16,736 16,684 h. Copies Not Dttibuled

(1) Office Use. Leovers, Spoard 277 253

(2) Raum hwn Nws Agernt 0 Q

LaulCadiAm of5ffll a.W2IvMM 17,013 16,937

Pwmnt PPad Wm RpwUd CIRculuion (asc/iss o) 99.59 99.15

Il.T Stinatmont ofOwrnip wicpiotnllt intle . anuaryl L iaus of i pucon. o CH boxlfnrt aqund to publish.

17. SigMadi gdito Pt ^in MMagir. or Ownem O

' /' --- Publisher 11/17/95 i Cf,y uat all inlomion oli n o i tornn i tr And ucOrM d. I ndwd Iuryon who furh sm or misladng Intcamon on this on or

iho onib matorwl or iomact Sd cn u t tmot miy be b tto bmkta nina W l I,aae s an d momm* a mw u ad l Wamcim p skm*V -4*e do-a dd Xper-90

JANUARY 1996 / ART EDUCATION A

I I

,!?i~l Hrz~I2



Documents

Learning to Look/Looking at Learning || Constructivism and Connection Making in Art Education