Hello Everyone!
I am honored to be the NAEA Mentor for the month of November, 2011. This is my first time as a “blogger” and I’ve been looking forward to it. You may know that I teach at Kutztown University of Pennsylvania, where we have a very large undergraduate art education program, consisting of anywhere from 250 – 300 undergraduate art education majors and approximately 100 graduate students actively enrolled in our M.Ed. in Art Education program. With all of these wonderful students and an equally wonderful group of colleagues, I am surrounded daily by the issues and possibilities we face as art educators. Throughout the month of November, I hope to share some of the insights I’ve gleaned over the years, report on some of the experiences that my students and I have had along with thoughts we’ve had as a result, and raise questions for us all to consider.
I’ve said so many times, “I’m a curriculum person!” This means, I suppose, that for as long as I can remember being involved in art teaching, I’ve cared about curriculum—what it is, what it might be, how to work with others to create it, how to share it, how to get rid of it when it’s not working, and so on. In addition to the role that curriculum development plays in my own day-to-day teaching, thinking about and creating curriculum for art has taken up most of my professional life. Much of what will appear in my posts over the next few weeks will have to do with curriculum. I can’t help it, first of all. Secondly, I think most art educators like to think about curriculum.
We tend to think about curriculum because we really do care about what our students learn. Art teachers tend to be passionate about making sure that their students learn to love art as much as they do. We want our students to understand how important art is in our lives as human beings. We generally have broad definitions of art, extending our interest toward things that human beings make and have made for hundreds of years, for lots of different uses. We get excited when we see something that another person has created, whether it is polished and sophisticated or raw and untutored.
I’m especially fond of “raw and untutored,” but, probably like you, love all kinds of art. Here are some images of things I’ve found as I roam around the streets of Kutztown, Pennsylvania or the beautiful rural roadways surrounding the borough:
I don’t know who made the snow people. I spotted them in town one day as the snow was beginning to melt. Bill Fox, a local retired mailman, created the bird topiary and a whole lot more of its kind, along with many other forms of “yard art” on the grounds of this one-room schoolhouse that he and his wife, Dorothy, have restored about a mile outside of town.
So, you ask, what does this have to do with curriculum? Perhaps this is a good place to stop for the day, and turn that question back to you. I’d love to read some of your ideas about that.
My next post will consider these and other things that we art teachers tend to love, and how we might turn our passions into curriculum that makes a difference in the lives of our students.
-Marilyn Stewart
Well, greetings from Ohio Dr. Stewart!! I can attest that she truly does love curriculum, and I have to confess that I truly miss that aspect of teaching, but enjoy working on it with the student teachers I supervise. Perhaps this is off topic but I would like to hear your comments on the continuing emphasis on standards. I recently helped Ohio reinvision their state art standards, with mixed feelings. What do you see as the possible advantages/disadvantages of this increased emphasis and what are the implications for curriculum design in the art classroom? Are they for the students or for teachers, or both?
Posted by: Justin P. Sutters | November 01, 2011 at 07:30 PM
Hey Justin! You are definitely pushing me ahead of the train! I intended to get to standards. But oh well, let's go for it now.
What I love about the new SAS (Standards Aligned System) in Pennsylvania is that Curriculum Frameworks include Big Ideas, Concepts, Competencies, and Essential Questions aligned to Standards and Assessment Anchors and, where appropriate, Eligible Content.
My plan for this November blog is to move the discussion from what we love about art, to BIG IDEAS about art and the human experience, and eventually to the importance of teaching toward the understanding of BIG IDEAS. I think we were asking the wrong questions early on when we asked, "What do students need to know and be able to do?" in an effort to determine standards. If we are serious about teaching art for LONG TERM understanding and appreciation (that is, kids grow into adults and still have deep understandings about the arts and our experiences with them), then we need to teach, not the bits of knowledge and specific skills ALONE, but in the context of much larger and more important (in the long run) understandings about art and the human experience. So, while I think that in some cases the standards had us focusing on things that in the long run were not so important, I am encouraged by the work in Pennsylvania and elsewhere that recognizes the importance of teaching for UNDERSTANDING and places emphasis on standards in a broader context.
Posted by: Marilyn Stewart | November 01, 2011 at 10:51 PM
Well said,
I definitely noticed that while working on the Ohio standards. Likewise, I see it as problematic when working with student teachers as they become so focused on academic content, especially from other disciplines, that is severely hampers any overarching theoretical frameworks or concepts. I will try to not alter this discussion any further--consider me ON the train and along for the ride!!
Posted by: Justin P. Sutters | November 08, 2011 at 10:43 AM
Hello Dr. Stewart,
I began the education chapter of my life in 1994 as an arts educator in the elementary schools of a rural New Mexico school system. Now an English and drama secondary teacher in the same district, I am pursuing a doctorate in C&I with emphasis on art integration as a means to keep the arts active in all schools.
I understand that art integration cannot replace art educators, but as a both a drama and English teacher I have a passion for the importance of art throughout the curriculum. My dissertation will be focused on the process of designing such a curriculum as I study the development of curriculum at an arts charter school.
Art provides valuable experiences of all students to connect and express perceptions through so many avenues that are denied by what too many classroom teachers either deny or ignore as the standards of core curriculum become obstacles instead of springboards for possibilities.
I look forward to an engaging month of blogging as the arts are explored through the lens of curriculum. Justin, I look forward to your input as how preservice teachers are exposed to curriculum possibilities that include exploration beyond that of academic content.
Posted by: Jill Hare | November 10, 2011 at 07:52 PM