What’s Worth or Not Worth Teaching in Art? That is the Question.

Summary
Upon reading the required material for Module 1, I started sensing that the question “What is worth teaching in art?” is just as heavy-loaded as the other hard-to-define question “What is Art?” These answers can easily be influenced by subjective perceptions and lobbyists’ intentions, but the subject is too broad to put in the proverbial box for standardization purposes. However, these articles attempt to reconcile the different viewpoints and solidify an idea that curriculum should prepare students to be critical thinkers through divergent methods of play, open-ended questions, and challenging common knowledge as the only valid truth in order to capture their attention and have them invested into their own education.

The common goals of each author were to empower teachers in creating effective curricula that will engage students to be active participants in their educational journey through K-12, and plant seeds of positive habits through lesson plans that will enable students to cultivate a desire to ask questions and seek answers for themselves in art and other aspects of their lives. Wiggins (2002) discusses the impossible belief that students will have learned everything in their academic tenure in school by describing it as stylish bow, “rather than the TV-view that by the end of a class or school career all the ‘answers’ have been ‘taught’ and tied together in a happy ending (p. 49).” Instead, Wiggins implores instructors to give novices the tools to be successful during their time in school and after graduation by encouraging self-awareness. In this kind of environment, we should prompt students to unveil their thoughts, explore their own boundaries and intrinsic value in their community, and to question everything just like the same experts they are learning from/about. The authors charge teachers with the responsibility to prepare more in-depth modules that go beyond the scope of archaic or trite art education practices that limit the beginning stages of the creative process for pupils before projects are introduced.

Each author supports the idea that art education curriculum should challenge, engage and inspire students to be active participants in their own education. Also, they seem to unanimously agree that critical thinking is the key to academic success, but each article proposes its own approach on how to build an inclusive and engaging lesson plan. Wiggins (2002) and Bolin’s (1996) idea of curriculum planning is influenced by the independence from force-fed information. In comparison, Wiggin refers to Boorstun’s (1985) notion, “Take nobody’s word for it, see for yourself (p.45).” and Bolin spells it very clearly in the title of his article, We Are What We Ask. I found this article to be quite refreshing because it posed those questions educators should ask themselves and of their students. Additionally, I enjoyed the word play Bolin uses to hit home the similar idea of “we are what we eat.” Therefore, the teacher should prepare students to seek out answers for themselves instead of accepting what is put before them like fast food. Gude (2007) takes this a step further introducing her Principle of Possibilities, which are backed up by research from The University of Chicago’s Spiral Workshops and colleagues. She referred to childhood development and psychological research to explain the importance of play and teachers should allows students to make creative messes so they can work through the process. Whereas, Lampert (2013) actually defines what each previous author described. Lampert actually refers to the importance of critical thinkingand conducted a study that focused on the success of inquiry-based curriculums.

Key Points
Wiggins’ (2002) main idea explained why is impossible to teach students everything about art within the span of their academic career. Instead, we should instill in them the hunger to learn more, ask questions, and challenge common knowledge. Therefore, they will have acquired a lifelong skill of seeking out information for themselves and have a better opportunity to be successful in learning and absorbing information. He believes that students should be trained in this way so asking questions is from muscle-memory like an athlete.

Bolin’s (1996) key point focused on utilizing the cliché, “you are what you eat” as a homage to reinforce the idea that we are who we are by asking questions as to why are we here and what is our purpose in life. As it is quite amusing, it is also important to understand that we are a summation of our human experiences while on earth, so it is our responsibility to enhance those chances by getting to know ourselves, inspect our environments, question our existence, and significantly contribute to the global conversation.

Gude’s (2007) article suggests ways to update the curriculum to integrate students’ experiences into art making by being present, creating projects and opportunities for them to express themselves, stimulate a dialogue within the classroom so students can expand their investigation within themselves as a way for teachers to motivate these students into investing into their own learning. She offers very insightful explanations on how to integrate questions and engage students within lesson plans, such as developing organic images from inkblots, wax, and smoke marks, rather than build it around just one finite image or concept (p.8).

Lampert’s (2013) research advises instructors to turn away from direct inquiry that require yes/no answers and implement open-ended questions instead. This supports students in building their endurance for critical thinking in creativity. Like Gude, Lampert gave an in-depth account of how to prepare and build the Inside/Outside boxes. She used a worksheet to help students start the creative process on how they think they are seen as and how they perceive themselves. After, the materials were introduced and the students were given the freedom to express their own self-identities and thoughts.

Personal Reflection
As mentioned in the introduction, I felt these were heavy questions artists should ask themselves as well, let alone teachers and students. The questions proposed within the readings achieved its goal of making me wonder about my thought process in art and art education. I found these articles introduced refreshing ideas on how to create my future lesson plans by using open-ended questions and integrating additional ways that would encompass a concept, principle or element. I literally cracked up laughing when Gude (2007) discussed a module focusing on line because I was about to do exactly what she suggested not to do (p.7). Therefore, this article was perfectly timed by fate. Also, her article made me feel more confident in what I am doing within my classroom. I always remind students that art class is a time to use their other side of their brain, which is a nice break from all the reading, writing, arithmetic and sciences. As part of classroom management, I have been using a game called “Students-versus-Teacher”, in which, as a group, they earn a point for each positive behavior they exhibit. Last week, I taught the elements of art through dialogue and poster board. Then, we watched a Youtube video for additional reinforcement of the lesson. After the short video, we played trivia and the kids were so excited because they got to earn additional points for the Student-versus-Teacher game. The prize can be something as simple as two- minute volleyball or a chance to pick something from the treasure bucket at the end of class. Play is the simplest way to build bridges between people and by incorporating it, these children have brightened up, worked very hard and we bonded. Furthermore, I think play helps students be more inquisitive about everything and will keep their innate sense of wonder. Additionally, I really appreciated Lampert’s ideas for the after-school program and Gude’s examples for lesson plans. Each made me think about ways to expand the lessons in ways to motivate students to participate in class. I feel more prepared and empowered as an educator, and this module really helped me open my eyes to create interactive and engaging lesson plans, ways to enhance the dialogue between administration and art education, as well ways to pivot in my professional development.

 References
Bolin, P. (1996). We are what we ask. Art Education, 49(5), 6-10.

Gude, O. (2007). Principles of Possibility: Considerations for a 21^stcentury art & culture curriculum. Art Education, 60(1), 6-17.

Lambert, N. (2013). Inquiry and critical thinking in an elementary art program. Art Education, 66(6), p. 6-17.

Wiggins, G. (1989). The futility of trying to teach everything of importance. Educational Leadership, 47(3), 44-48, 57-59.