Summary/Analysis:
This article is very interesting to me, because I have
been trying to introduce Project Based Learning in Tijuana, Mexico, and it has
been hard for me explaining that a Project is not just a craft. Teachers seem
to believe that they can design a project based on what they think students
must learn and mix a craft and an exhibition in there, but sometimes the
projects designed are not meaningful to the students, and they are not
motivated. As I read this article I was able to think of strategies for
teachers to link art to critical thinking, thus making the projects meaningful
and important.
The article describes a study done in a community arts
programme designed to enhance critical thinking skills in children by engaging
them in enquiry-based art lessons. Ten urban elementary children participated
in the 12 week study. Eight undergraduate students enrolled to be part of the
programme. All of them had worked with children before and all had interest in serving
their community. The children were assessed in their critical thinking skills
two times, at the beginning and end of the study. The results of the test
showed significant increase in the children´s average critical thinking from
the pre-test to the post-tests.
I found the definition of enquiry-based or open-ended
lessons very useful. The author says they are "classroom activities that
require students to solve problems and answer questions that have more than one
possible resolution" (p. 56). I think that if teachers who are new to
project based learning focus on this kind of classes, they will be able to
reach more useful and meaningful results.
The programme lasted twelve weeks, two afternoons a
week, for one and a half hour sessions. It had three components: open ended,
enquiry-based artmaking lessons; the children had time to talk about artwork
with the group; the atmosphere in the classroom was friendly and welcoming (p.
57). These components seem to me like a recipe for success. If any class was
planned this way, there is a guarantee that it would be interesting, motivating
for students and reflective.
The undergraduates showed the children a variety of
cultural examples when introducing lessons, but they did not suggested that
they imitate the examples. They encouraged the children to develop their own
personal visual expressions. I have learned at HTH that having models and
examples prior to working is very useful because it gives students a guide and
it motivates them to focus on their own work, without wasting time finding out
what is expected of them.
At the beginning of each lesson, the undergraduates
would show PowerPoint presentations with artwork from several artists and
"the children interpreted what they saw and explained it to the group, as
a form of critical enquiry. Also, for most lessons the children completed
worksheets prior to artmaking. For these worksheets students sketched or listed
ideas for their art prior to creating it" (p. 57) I believe that
brainstorming before starting is key to creating true work. When it comes from
reflection, it shows the person´s true identity and it becomes important,
meaningful and intrinsically motivating.
The author gives a synopsis of the first two lesson
plans, their description and examples of the children’s works, general thoughts
about the experience, and summaries of the undergraduates’ written reflections
of what they thought, observed and heard in the community art classroom (p. 58-62).
The synopsis was very detailed and included pictures and dialogues from the
classes. This was very helpful for me to understand how the mood and feel of
the lessons was.
It also included an explanation on how the discussion
of the art pieces was conducted. The author mentions Barrett´s (1997) three
critical enquiry questions about art: What
do I see? What is the artwork about? How do I know? I find these questions
very appropriate to use with people of any age, from kindergarteners to adults.
Quotes:
“…for the group discussions about the children’s artwork, a child would
get in front of the group with his or her work, and often we would only need to
ask, ‘What do you see?’ and the children were off and running – eager to have a
chance to talk about what they saw in the artwork and what it meant. Sometimes
the young students talked over one another, and sometimes they joked rather than
give worthwhile interpretations of the piece, but for the most part, we had
enlightening discussions with the group.” (p. 60)
“Our understanding of the boy’s art
deepened through the group’s critical analysis of it. This was true with most
of the children’s boxes.” (p.60)
“I hoped that the mixed signals they
got would impress upon the children that things are not always as they appear,
and that people often see the same thing in different ways. In other words, I
hoped that we were opening the children’s minds to think critically.” (p.60)
“Through the course of the programme,
we saw a steady increase in the children’s ability to communicate their ideas
with words and images. And as the children learned more about themselves, we
learned more about the children.” (p. 63)
“…by the end of the programme the children were far more comfortable with
problem solving and analysis when it came to choosing and discussing images
that were representations of their identities.” (p. 64)
“…amongst the teaching of manual
skills, formal elements, and the various other necessary components of most US
public school elementary art curricula, units that
are interlaced with enquiry may sharpen
students’ critical thinking skills…” (p.64)
Comments:
This article was both inspiring and
helpful for me. I had not been able to
express to teachers what a good project, a good class or even a good discussion
should look like, and the article gave me a lot of ideas on how to introduce critical
thinking and a reflective environment in the classroom. I personally have been very interested in
introducing art in schools, but had not found a way to do it in a meaningful
way. The ideas given by the author are
very detailed.
The only thing I would say is that I
was left wondering a bit about the testing and the results. Te author mentions that they used the Test of Critical Thinking (Bracken et
al. 2003a), which is free and available to the public. I would have liked to
see more of the results of the children both in the pre-test and the post-test
since only one graphic was presented to explain their improvement on critical
thinking. She does mention that future
research might be necessary and it would replicate the study with a control
group.
Cited sources of
interest:
Barrett, T. (1997), Talking about Student Art, Worcester, MA: Davis Publications,
Inc.
Bracken, B., Bai, W., Fithian, E.,
Lamprect, M. S., Little, C. and Quek, C. (2003a), Test of Critical Thinking, Williamsburg, VA: The Center for
Gifted Education, College of William and
Mary.
Bracken, B., Bai, W., Fithian, E.,
Lamprect, M. S., Little, C. and Quek, C. (2003b), Test of Critical Thinking:
Examiner’s Manual, Williamsburg, VA: The Center for Gifted Education, College of William
and Mary.
Danko-McGhee, K. and Slutsky, R.
(2007), ‘Floating Experiences: Empowering Early Childhood Educators to
Encourage Critical Thinking in Young Children Though the Visual Arts’, Art Education, 60: 2, pp. 13–16.
Lampert, N. (2006a), ‘Enhancing
Critical Thinking with Aesthetic, Critical, and Creative Inquiry’, Art Education, 59: 5, pp. 46–50.
Walker, S. (2001), Teaching Meaning in Artmaking, Worcester, MA: Davis Publications.