Physical Space and the Teaching of Art - Frank Susi

8/7/2019 Physical Space and the Teaching of Art - Frank Susi

1/5

National Art Education Association

!"#$%&'()*+'&,)'-.)/",)0,'&"%-1)23)45/46/"257$89):5'-;).6&'/%2-?) @2(=)AB?)C2=)D)7E'5=?)FBGH8?)++=)HIB!6J(%$",.)J#9)C'/%2-'()45/)>.6&'/%2-)4$$2&%'/%2-*/'J(,)KLM9) http://www.jstor.org/stable/31929964&&,$$,.9)NAONAODNFN)FP9ND

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available athttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp . JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unlessyou have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and youmay use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained athttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=naea .

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printedpage of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content 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 Art Education.

http://www.jstor.org
http://www.jstor.org/stable/3192996?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=naeahttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/3192996?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=naea


2/5

Physical Space and

the Teaching of Art

Frank D. Susi

ArrangemenTs TnaT permit conversations Detween teacner andstudent to occur across the corner of a table enable both tobe in comfortable eye contact. Photo credit: Brian Miller.Distance, often a symbolic barrier between teacher and students,can be reduced by thoughtful spatial planning. Photo credit:Rrinn Miller

f the various factors that characterize effectiveteaching, the arrangement and use of classroomphysical space are especially significant for arteducators. Because of the tacit relationship

between environment and behavior, the setting where art

activities occur must be able to support a variety ofdistinctive instructional functions. Researchers fromvarious disciplines including sociology, environmentalphysiology, architecture, and education have studied howspatial variables affect attitudes, emotions, and behaviors.This information has implications for art educatorsbecause it influences work habits and communicativeexchanges between teachers and students. Although muchawareness of the impact of these spatial factors exists,many art teachers are uncertain about how to best utilizethem in individual classrooms.

This paper will present a series of spatial arrangementand usage concepts that can be applied in art educationsettings. These ideas can be a basis for improving teachingby expanding the range of instructional methods used byart teachers.

The significance of spatial arrangement and usage in artrooms stems from the two unique but interrelateddimensions of art teaching: 1)studio activity that isassociated with expression through art media, and 2) thecritical and appreciative experiences involved in responseto art. Each requires different spatial considerations ifthey are to occur within a physically and psychologicallysupportive setting.

Within the scholarly areas that examine spatial factors,two basic research orientations have emerged: 1) personalspace research which deals with the significance of spacerelative to the effects the physical arrangement ofsettings, movement pathways, and territories have on

individuals, and 2) proxemics research which deals withspatial usage as a cultural matter and asks questionsrelated to how response to crowding differs amongindividuals. While each orientation offers a uniquedisciplinary perspective, both have established that space isan important dimension in the learning environment.Many of these concepts can be adapted to the teaching ofart.

The arrangement and use of space are parts of thecomplex nonverbal communication system that exists inevery classroom. Nonverbal communication refers to the

Art Education March 1986

,.4~!~,--. .. .

"1~..

.

6


3/5


4/5

The spatial usage patterns and behaviors of personsfrom various cultures have been studied by Hall (1966).Results of his studies can be helpful in designing spatialsettings for a variety of art education activities. Hereported that in order for individuals to work and functionwith a reasonable amountof psychic comfort, four distinctzones or distances which people establish and maintainbetween themselves and others can be identified. They aresummarized as follows:

Intimate DistanceClose phase: 0-6 inches. For very intimate interactions,

often involving body contact such as touching orcomforting.

Far phase: 6-18 inches. For less intense but still intimateinteractions; usually considered improper in public (exceptin impersonal situations where defensive devicescounteract it).Personal Distance (the usual distance we maintain betweenourselves and others)

Close phase: 1V/-2 /2 feet. For people bonded in someway such as wife and husband.

Far phase: 2 /2-4 feet. The limit of physical domination;used for

discussing subjectsof

personalinterest.

Social DistanceClose phase: 4-7 feet. For impersonal business; used by

people who work together.Far phase: 7-12 feet. For formal business, such as in

offices.Public Distance

Close phase: 12-25 feet. For more formal speeches suchas presentations to small audiences.

Far phase: 25 feet and more. For situations when speechamplification or shouting are involved.

These zones or distances are unconsciously triggered inindividuals and are mediated by four variables: the setting,the relationship or task of the persons, the emotions of theindividuals, and the physical space arrangements of thesetting. An awareness of these personal space factors canbe helpful to art teachers as they plan classroom spatiallayouts.

The direction from which the teacher approaches andtalks to individual students while they are working instudio-type activities suggests another spatial usageconsideration. Arrangements that permit conversationsbetween the teacher and a student to occur across thecorner of a desk or table enable both individuals to be incomfortable eye contact with one another while directingtheir attention to the work being discussed. Talking withstudents from over the shoulder is an approach method

that is often used by art teachers. While allowing bothteacher and student to share a common view of the work,this method precludes the opportunity for establishingvaluable eye contact during the communication exchange.Spaces for Responding to ArtA variety of unique spatial needs are suggested by thoseexperiences associated with responding to art. Theseactivities may include a variety of instructional methodssuch as written assignments, individual presentations,group discussions, critiques, and demonstrations. In mostcases, spaces intended for written work should be plannedto minimize distractions and focus student attention on thetask while allowing access for visitation by the teacher.

Arrangements to facilitate written work may be similar tosettings designed for art-making activities. Groupdiscussions, critiques, and other response orientedinstruction emphasize verbal interactions among classmembers and the teacher. In most cases, attention isdirected to a specific individual or part of the room.Planning spatial arrangements for these activities shouldbe done while considering the desired levels ofinterpersonal communication that will occur.

Research studies have shown that the spatial aspect ofinstruction featuring teacher-student interactions mostconsistently linked to achievement is pupil seat locationrelative to the teacher. Individuals located near the front ofthe room and close to the teacher tend to be more attentiveand achieve higher grades than those in more distantpositions (Weinstein, 1979). Exactly why this happens hasnot been firmly established although researchers speculatethat the quality of eye contact that occurs is an importantfactor in this instructional context. Argyle & Dean (1965)reported that during verbal interactions, people look ateach other in the eye repeatedly, but for very short periodsof time. Emitters tend to watch the expressions of receiversso

theycan obtain feedback and

judgethe effects of what

they have said. Receivers likewise watch eye behavior forclues to help in understanding what has been said. Studentslocated physically close to the teacher, such as in front seatlocations, are able to establish and maintain clear eyecontact with the teacher. Other students, located in moredistant seats or who are at severe angles to the teacher andout of range for comfortable glance, are less able toestablish eye contact. As a result, those individuals do notfully participate in the mutual give and take behaviornecessary for obtaining important nonverbal clues aboutthe information being communciated. Generally, asdistance between teacher and student increases, eye contactdecreases. Close physical proximity and good eye contact

in verbal interaction situations are major factors in thecommunication that takes place. This phenomenon isrelative to the specific cultural situation in which it occursbut may partially explain the relationship between seatlocation and student achievement in classrooms.

An example of this principle can be observed in aclassroom where students are directed to gather in closearound a table or easel for a critique or demonstration.This relocating of students is usually done to assure thateveryone can see the work clearly. An analysis of theresulting situation shows that the revised arrangementshave altered certain interpersonal behaviors that are partsof the instruction process. When the class gathers in close

to the teacher, voice volume of the participants adaptsto conversational levels and casual pacing of speechdelivery occurs. Distance, often a symbolic barrier betweenthe teacher and students, is reduced as class members,both seated and standing, are within the four foot,Personal Distance zone. Many of the physical barriers suchas tables and desks that create formal divisions of theterritories within the room are also removed. The closeproximity of the students and teacher permitsunobstructed eye contact and comfortable glance behaviorwith most class members.

These arrangement principles can be adapted for use ina variety of other instructional situations such as lesson

Art Education March 19868


5/5

Figure 1. This classroom has been arranged for expressive activities.The four long rows with five desks in each have created a network oftight passages and disruptive traffic routes. Many students are inlocations that make teacher visits difficult.

Figure 2. In this revised layout, four desks have been removed andothers repositioned. The resulting arrangement provides each studentwith an aisle seat location for visitations by the teacher. Restrictivepassageways are reduced and travel routes for obtaining supplies,storing projects, and visiting the sink are simplified.

introductions, reviews, and presentations where eyecontact and physical proximity can help to mediate clearcommunication. In many cases these spatial considerationscan be introduced into classrooms that must alsoaccommodate ongoing studio projects. Spatial changes canbe introduced that do not involve the continual moving ofbulky furniture. The time involved in relocating studentsshould be minimal. In instances where the entire classperiod is devoted to a discussion activity, student chairs

can be arranged into a horseshoe or small circle where eyecontact is encouraged. Such a configuration can be a signalto students as they enter the room of expected lesson focusand desired levels of interaction.

Physical changes alone can promote if not guaranteeimproved student achievement. The positive aspects ofspatial usage can be a basis for improving the instructionalquality of response activities.ConclusionThis paper has presented a brief review of informationabout the arrangement and use of physical space in artclassrooms. These theories can be a basis for makingdecisions about the physical environment so that it can be

designed to supportinstructional

goalsand

expandone's

range of teaching methods.Each of the two modes of instruction practiced widely in

art education, self expression and response activities,requires unique spatial considerations. No single roomlayout is best for every learning experience. Planningclassroom arrangements involves an awareness of thespatial dimension of nonverbal behavior and the expectedor desired levels of interaction that will occur as part of thelesson.

While attention to the spatial environment is only oneaspect of the instructional process, it is a vital componentin the complex physical and social system that exists inevery classroom. Increased understanding about thesesystems is a step toward enhancing the effectiveness ofteaching efforts. Applying these ideas with imaginationand sensitivity can maximize the impact of art experiencesupon our students. i

Frank D. Susi is an Associate Professor of Art at KentState University, Ohio.

Reference NotesGalloway, C.M. Nonverbal: the persistent language of real

communication. Unpublished manuscript, 1981. The Ohio StateUniversity, Columbus, Ohio.

ReferencesArgyle, M. and Dean, N. Eye contact, distance, and affiliation.

Sociometry, September, 1965, 28 (3), 289-304.Hall, E.T. The hidden dimension. Garden City, New York: Doubleday

& Co., 1966.Sommer, R. Classroom layout. Theory Into Practice, June 1977, 16

(3), 174-175.Weinstein, C. Modifying student behavior in an open classroom

through changes in the physical design. American Educational ResearchJournal, 1977, 14 (3), 249-262.

Weinstein, C. The physical environment of the school: a review of theresearch. Review of Educational Research, Fall, 1979, 49 (4), 577-610.

Art Education March 1986 9

Documents

Physical Space and the Teaching of Art - Frank Susi