Elizabeth Willett and the DBAE

           Educational leader, historian, innovator, newsletter editor, collaborator, curriculum and grant writer, ecologist, mathematician, and philanthropist are only a few of the many vibrant fibers Elizabeth Willett, weaves into her fabric of everyday life in and outside of her career as professional art enthusiast at Oakhurst Elementary School in Lubbock, Texas.

In her eleventh year of teaching, Willett’s pedagogy is a reflection of those many strands, weaving the student’s minds through what would be deemed a discipline-based art education (DBAE) program at its finest. Leading by doing, her voice in the community and surrounding state of Texas carries a modest tone, but her firm stance, presence and partnership with vital arts organizations (district trainer and curriculum writer for Binney and Smith/Crayola Dream Makers Program and newsletter editor and treasurer-elect for the Texas Art Education Association to name a couple), convey that the arts play an essential role in the every day, that the spice of life comes from the experience, the expression, and not being afraid to question and dream.

A qualitative approach that very much mirrors the California Visual Arts Standards and that of the DBAE, Willett helps and allows her students to view, process the information, analyze it and respond to it with a language that they are familiar with, encouraging the Spanish speaking children to respond in their native tongue (CA Standard 1). She helps them to make connections to relevant mathematics and language, producing a visual connection to the world around them through discussion and visualization of the work of the artist and that of their own work, creating figurative examples similar, but related to their own lives (CA Standards 2, 4 and 5) while raising funds to create projects and plan trips that will allow her students to grow universally as well as culturally (CA Standards 3 and 6).

Holding with a formal structure of delivery paired with an underlying positive reinforcement at every moment of exchange, her classroom and the subject of study, discussion and implementation of the product of art produced, integrates many other disciplines into the threads of her fabric of leading. Tapping into her students’ multiple intelligences, modeling the way, and encouraging her students to think more deeply about community, world and self, that every discipline is interwoven and more easily understood if explored through the arts, helps to produce students with no discipline problems, only interested, excited participants.

The benefits of a program such as hers values the individual voice within the student while coupled with the views of others throughout history as well as those sitting directly to their left, that having a voice is acceptable. The drawbacks are few, given that her passion for the arts is evident and dyes the threads of the fabric that is designed into each extra curricular role that she takes on. Ringing true with the voice of Elliot Eisner, Willett’s art program exemplifies and champions that “arts are fundamental resources through which the world is viewed, meaning is created and the mind developed.”

Education for a Democratic Society

The John Dewey model of Progressive Education, of social justice that is vital to a democratic society, promoting critical thinking, creativity and self-direction in modes of acquiring knowledge and the interest in continuing to do so throughout one’s life, the “group consciousness”, a holistic effort, should be the primary thrust of education. To emphasize “the teacher’s role…should…encourage each child to develop intellectually, emotionally, physically, perceptually, aesthetically, socially, and creatively through art-making” (Stankiewicz, 38), as stated by Viktor Lowenfeld, or rather to develop the whole person and “promote values that transcend the boundaries of the art lesson” (Children and Their Art: Methods for the Elementary School, 1982, section eight) and explore how this will contribute to a wholesome society, giving meaning to this life.

            To understand the meaning, to break it down, would be to open up a cosmic truth that is so evident and rudimentary that we can only guess at why it could not be seen when it is plain as the nose of our faces. Creativity and curiosity of how things work, why they work the way that they do, and the expression of how things could be made better is an innate, divine if you will, trait that every person is born with. To be able to explore something on a structured level, to question why it is so freely and without ridicule, to understand that there is “no such thing as a noncreative person,” (session 5) opens up the individual to a myriad of potential answers to any query and continues to make their life worthy of the trip. To not foster the child-like attributes of such is to help an individual in society lead an unfulfilling life.

            What this means for art education, or education in general is a recognition of the split between being educated and learning. What Dewey and his contemporaries understood and believed in is of the latter, that the individual must be engaged and interested in what they are learning in order to retain and transfer this knowledge throughout the rest of their livelihoods as people. Their intent was to create a basis for the education of the learner through incorporation of and a balance between the delivery of the knowledge and fuse it with the interests and experiences of the student, no matter how vast, because their voice was unique to them alone and their motivation imperative to their future as innovators and contributors to a common societal growth.

            For progressive education to work, educators must be able to see each individual tree, plainly in front of them, contemplating their contribution to the vastness of its diversifying grandeur that makes up the forest. They must first examine the bark and leaves, roots, shoots and branches (qualities) that make each (student) unique and incorporate this knowledge into the understanding of how this balance of individual differences (character and background), through meaningful structure and guidance, fosters expression and creativity that strengthens the whole community through the self-motivated discovery.

Progressive Education?

To reflect on my own general art education would not be fair to the educational system as a whole, but it seems that no measures were taken, in my rural setting, to help develop an understanding of the elements of the discipline. The teacher-figure did not serve as “a sympathetic listener and guide who won the children’s confidence and learned from them, while encouraging them to discover and express the principles of each subject” (Stankiewicz, 34), instead it was a constant struggle to find a socially acceptable outlet for my perceptive, introverted, intuitive need for expression.

            When art classes were afforded to be included in the elementary curriculum (I only remember an art teacher in the fourth grade and in high school), the ‘how’ or ‘why’ we were creating a project was not discussed, only the process to achieve something that somewhat resembled the art teacher’s model. By the time high school art classes were offered, the only way to fit ‘inner passion’ into my schedule was through independent study classes offered in the teacher’s preparation time. There, the teacher served as guide, but did not influence my thoughts beyond the theme of the project that was to be achieved.

John Dewey would more than likely describe my experience as a failure to educate the spirit of the individual, from an institutional reference. My education was no more a combination of the traditional as it was the progressive mode of an art educational experience. Neither was I educated in the “stimulation of the child’s powers by the demands of the social situations in which he finds himself”, nor was I instructed in knowing “what it’s end, use, or function” (The School Journal, 77) was.

As an educator myself, I have striven to give my students a freedom of expression with the materials, discussing the elements of art, historical figures and their significance to our culture, while relating projects to other disciplines such as math, science, and writing. This gave them the confidence to tackle vast subject matter with an excitement was that contagious, something that was not awakened in me until much later in life, taken out of the “passive, receptive, or absorbing attitude” (The School Journal, 78) and into the curiosity that is present in the making of art, based on principles of knowledge.

In his pedagogic creed, Dewey is fervent in his opinion that “education is the fundamental method of social progress and reform,” speaking not only of art education, but the institution as a whole. So, where in the last century and a half has the institution served the individual, to “prepare him for the future life…to give him command of himself”? (The School Journal, 77) It is possible, I admit, that my experience was a fluke, a mere slip in not peaking my interest, to develop those inert abilities. But, I would also wager to guess that I was not alone on the road of preconceived ideas of what society wants so desperately to stifle: creativity.

A Progressive Art Revolution Through Technology?

All forms of technological advances over the course of history, from the written text of demonstrative books to the now prevalent white boards and Internet, have been established by innovative, creative minds who wanted to help instill an elevated culture in future generations, adequate social morals and values and to make knowledge more readily available. An educational revolution, like that of the early twentieth century may well be at hand.

“Progressive reformers believed that Americans had a social responsibility to change traditional patterns of behavior into patterns that were both conducive to regular work and tolerant of the accompanying boredom.” (Stankiewicz, 69) Today’s thrust into the modern world of visual over-stimulus could not only aide the art educator’s relation of cultural history, design methods, appreciation and color theory, but can also lend to an evolution of change by keeping students interested. “Access to images made possible by computers and the Internet” (Stankiewicz, 114) could serve as models but, time may be the greatest factor in holding most of these teachers back from exploring this avenue in its fullest capacity.

Many, if not all, arts programs are set on the back burners of our educational systems, the first to be cut when the budget is tight, therefore programs exist in time frames of half hour periods, once a week, if not once a month, which creates “a failure” for art educators “to use this great result of modern enterprise as a factor in the mental and spiritual training of the youth of today.” (Stankeiwicz, 107)

Institutions, agencies, publications and others that aid in the education process for the importance of the arts, like that of Davis Art, the publisher of School Arts magazine, established in 1901, http://www.davisart.com, have been leading the way to create an ideal environment for learning and expressing through use of written word, pictures and also audio presentations. “Early twentieth-century…school art” once “emerged as a series of simplified projects, often lacking in content,” (Stankiewicz, 81) which may be another reason technology is oft not included into an arts discipline. While teachers will argue that there is not time enough in a class period, there is still time enough to demonstrate with it, because the school should be seen as “a repository of ‘the fading culture of the past’ as well as an active agent of the present.” (Stankiewicz, 79-80)

            Are art educators speaking against educating to our consumerist conformity through the non-use of this media “a stereotyped, frivolous incursion on the real work of art learning…the rise of consumer values” (Stankiewicz, 67-68), trying to remain true to the original voice of the aesthetics of the arts as a hand-eye visual media? As it is in business, immediate results can not be expected when an idea is conceived, a product is introduced or a theory of practice released, neither can this question expect a quick answer. The discipline can only strive forward toward the future as anything else, using the tools possessed, to the best knowledge, with the time allowed.

Industry and Arts Education

For more than a century, the arts have served as creative innovator to the world of education related to U.S. industry and career development. The drastic move of the economy from an industrialized nation to that of a technological workforce has made interlocutors, interested educational restructuring to benefit future productive citizens, re-evaluate the values present in our quickly changing world.

            Leading educators have penned and voiced their concern for more than two decades regarding the inadequate education that a newly materialized, No Child Left Behind strategy forces upon our students, to memorize and regurgitate uninteresting information, to follow an instructor’s directions and not ask questions. What has been lacking through the initiation of such programs, that of creative thought, has led to a further plummet in the achievement gap, a loss of interest from America’s most able-bodied and potential workforce, our children.

            “If the child is prevented from enjoying these experiences…the special sensitivity which draws them to them will vanish, with disturbing effects,” (Crain, 1949) once stated psychologist Maria Montessori. And while she was, at the time, denoting children of elementary age, this also rings true for individuals of all ages who have not been allowed to explore their guttural interests, to express and find their inner voice, to ultimately lead them to become more productive, thoughtful, well-rounded citizens.

            While the emphasis on drawing was once thought to be “needed for intellectual, moral, and economic reasons…that seeing correctly required trained powers of perception and visual discrimination”, the same holds true in today’s world of mass communication and video games. Whereas schools used to invigorate and encourage “student self interest and self-confidence” (Stankiewicz 10,12), the technology market outside of the classroom has now engaged them, teaching faster than an educator can keep up and that is where a vested interest must take place between the school setting and the economy.

            A myriad of educational institutions and business professionals have recently joined the conversation, creating partnerships with local high schools to provide internship and tech prep opportunities for those interested in pursuing college majors/careers in the arts (The FIT Tech Prep Program, established in 1991), provided on-the-job training with working art professionals (Cape Cod, Martha's Vineyard & Nantucket School-to-Careers Art Internship Program), created opportunities for self-interested, tech-savvy students to engage in the instructional content (Academic Earth video courses) lending their voice to the discussion of  “which skills are lacking and what can be done to address this change.” (Help Wanted: Workforce Development & The New Economy)

What was once a truth in favor of an arts education over one hundred years ago, can still serve as “a means to counteract the loss of human dignity” (Stankiewicz, 46-48) that prevails in the present day society of school-aged children. The only obstacle remains in gaining enough interlocutors, from the business sector and concerned individuals alike, to voice their stance and participate in the reformation process of our educational system. The process has begun, but how long will it be before it takes complete hold?

http://www3.fitnyc.edu/techprep

http://sparkaction.org/content/new-take-school-career-connections-muse

http://www.cmfa.org/art-internship-program.asp

http://academicearth.org/

http://publicforuminstitute.org/publications/reports/workforce02.pdf

Drawing Education, Past & Present

Advancement in any chosen field, even that of drawing, means that basic ideas have evolved and change has taken place. Through the use of more productive methods, technology has thusly lead to a more productive livelihood for the individuals performing the tasks, technology, referring to the instrument, the tool used in enhancing a concept. But, the constant question that permeates in the educator’s mind is “will this help my students achieve more?”

Our civilization is and has always been advancing toward a more productive future, grounded with a base of forward thinkers, because the conversation about and for ideas of change have spurred the interlocutors to be creative in imagining the possibilities, when faced with a challenge. “Inventions made it possible” to learn “more efficiently…” (Stankiewicz, 6) When the “common school” was formed, and all children in our nation were provided an education, measures needed to be taken to ensure the best delivery possible, of the most important information. The tools were provided and then the methods of issuing a certain thought were conveyed.

Today, tools have changed considerably, but the delivery method has not quite caught up within the schools, but rather outside of them. The world wide web offers tutorials on almost any topic imaginable, showing step-by-step processes, pulling from collegiate institutions to the average person sitting at home. YouTube.com and other similar sites allow you to possess the information and then relay the information to others. Now, more than ever, drawing can be taught at any level with a few clicks of the mouse, the world at our finger tips, literally.

To leave out any method of instruction, and the tools needed to convey them, whether from such art interlocutors’ concepts as Jacob Bigelow’s use of visual models, Walter Smith’s constructive drawing emphasis, G. Stanley Hall’s pedocentric approach, or Louis Prang’s methodology of representational drawing, is not even thought of and would be detrimental to any student. For, as a child develops, each method can be found useful, if incorporated together, infusing all disciplines to make the world more relevant to the student.

Art teachers now have an opportunity to teach their students that drawing is not only pleasurable, but that it teaches the mind to work harder. Their job is largely more complex than the regular classroom educator, in that they have can explore every subject through hands-on, dimensional projects. Within their classroom, topics can be aptly enhanced by the incorporation of technology, but it is up to the teacher to use them to the advantage of their student’s present-relevancy, seeking minds.  

There are a plethora of methods, interpretations and information available in our cultural history that can only enhance our future thinking if presented to the absorbent, young, developing minds of our changing society. If a drawing education can incorporate each of the aforementioned interlocutor’s methods and also the new uses of technological tools that each year springs forth, our student’s advancement in any chosen field will surely shorten the achievement gap in our schools.

Sheppard & Price: Art Teachers

To read the interviews of both Donald Sheppard and Jean Price as art educators was more than interesting, to hear their separate views, not only in their aesthetic approach to the basic information, but also their personal level of interest in the arts. The theory behind their craft and a shared vision of what they inherently want students to walk away from their class with, being better people in the end, was thrilling. Both teachers were seen to wear many hats outside of their profession, exhibiting their personal determination through their work ethics, passing their passion for the possibilities of art on to their students.

While Sheppard’s roots come from a “practicing” artist background of what would now be termed as graphic design, he was able to use that important knowledge in his classroom. Also, through his involvement with his church community, he was able to gain valuable insight to the needs and abilities of the youth around him, “from the fact that he really cares about the kids, and they know it” (Sheppard, 4) which led to fostering respect from and among his students.

Price, though a self-proclaimed “non-practicing” artist, has similarly brought with her a charisma for helping students to “understand that forms are a means of communication, that they represent something beyond themselves.” (Price, 9) She engages in conversations that lead to a better understanding of art, “addressing line quality, composition, value, forms, textures, and so on,” (Price, 7), trying to reveal the misconceptions and increase the appreciation of art in every day life.

Sheppard realizes the embedding emphasis of moral values that the art room provides, not only in the crafting of the product, but of sharing, cooperative learning, time management and respect for one another, that “they’re going to have to find a way to get along” (Sheppard, 8), but does he realize the impact that his personal life lends to the way his classroom is run, the effects of his temperament because of his involvement with family and community through the church and his being a pillar and role model as pastor? He has stated that it seems to help with discipline issues.

“They’re motivated because they love art” (Price, 4), but could that be fostered from the teacher’s knowledge of the expanse of the profession beyond the classroom walls, the value that is placed in opening a closed mind to new possibilities? The best inference that I could make would point to the affirmative in both cases. They holistically seem to care about the individual.

Sheppard and Price’s lives established a lack of information about the arts as a whole and the careers that could be sought out in art, where the vast amount of possibilities were not expounded upon. One can only surmise where their passion for teaching art comes from: to help future generations know that “It’s not that you have to be able to draw. It’s that you have the ability to see” (Sheppard, 9) the world in its entirety. 

Read: Anderson, Tom. "Donald Sheppard: Shepherd to the Community." Real Lives: Art Teachers and the Cultures of Schools. 92-112. Chicago: Heinemann, 2000.
Anderson, Tom. "Jean Price: Changing with the Times." Real Lives: Art Teachers and the Cultures of Schools. Chicago: Heinemann, 2000. 45-60.