R842..05 ERIC REPORT RESUME

FD 010 275 3...09..67 64 (REV)THE USES OF NEWER MEDIA IN ART EDUCATION PROJECT.LANIER, VINCENTMYK43740 NATIONAL ART EDUCATION ASSN., WASHINGTON, DA.

FORS PRICE MF...$0.18 HC- '$4.28 107P.

*ART EDUCATION, *MEDIA SPECIALISTS, *SYMPOSIA, *TEACHER SEMINARS,CONSULTANTS, *MEDIA RESEARCH, TEACHING MACHINES, DISTRICT OF COLUMBI

THE IMPACT OF EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY ON ART INSTRUCTION WAS STUDIEDDURING A 5-DAY SYMPOSIUM. THE PARTICIPANTS WERE 50 ART EDUCATORS AND4 MEDIA SPECIALISTS. HUMAN LEARNING AND DEVELOPMENT, RESEARCH IN THEMEDIA FIELD RELEVANT TO ART EDUCATION, MEDIA HARDWARE, ANDPROJECTION OF PRESENT MEDIA TENDENCIES WERE EXPLORED AND EXAMINEDTHROUGH PAPERS, PANEL DISCUSSIONS, SEMINARS, GRCUP ANALYSIS, ANDSIMILAR APPROACHES. BASED ON TEACHING LEVEL, SEPINAR GROUPS WEREFORMED OF (1) ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY TEACHERS, (2) SUPERVISORS,(3) ART EDUCATORS IN HIGHER EDUCATION, AND (4) ART EDUCATORSREPRESENTING RESEARCH INTEREST. DISSEMINATION ACTIVITIES INCLUDED AMULTIMEDIA (SLIDE- FILM -TALK) PRESENTATION AND PUBLICATIONS.SYMPOSIUM PAPERS, SYMPOSIUM DISCUSSIONS, CONCLUSIONS, ANDRECOMMENDATIONS ARE REPORTED. DISCUSSION TOPICS INCLUDED (1)TECHNOLOGY AND ART EDUCATION, (2) IMPACT OF THE MACHINE, (3)INTERDISCIPLINARY APPROACHES, 141' CONDITIONS FOR THE USE OF MEDIA,(5) CHANGES IN ART EDUCATION RELEVANT TO MEDIA, AND (6) PRACTICALPROBLEMS IN THE USE OF MEDIA. (RS)

M. S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION AND WELFAREOffice of Education

TM document has been reproduced exactly as received from Usperson or organ.zai.on originating it. Points of view or opinionsIOW do not necessarily represent official Office ot Educationpoottion or policy.

Unit

of

ii4.....;,4

iLiki

çT

Vince

Lc

t,

,

0 )4

U

-",'="Tio ).

U-4. ,.1

I J a L.,

Li

L.

final I

ewe

14

Li

LU

, I k.

0

o t fses

ediaes ca io

projecta

r

44

.5 , ' I'Y''1/ ..'1 I `I.1 ..

' ' 1 i.'' ' l' ,' I f, ' A, ,I,' I '' , ..' , ,a ,1-- ,,

1 ft 4i

4 11,1' ' ' i'''' . i' r- , ' *4','

,, 'It l'Oci 4 '' r t 1- ' CI' Ia`,. ',

'. '''

i I:s I II."' , rr, ,'I II"4;44,tiqz!o:k ,"' ' ? 4, :.;' " '''' '"v

1/4 .44,-4,,- ,I., .4 10 '"4. ;'',""' j' :,: -, ), .44 :,d, ; '1 -I ''";',- ', ,,', '

.4 ,.. k 4 ,4,4, '' "l'", , 1., '4 ..',,y :'.: 1 .4,''

4' , `: '' ' ' 1 "'''," 4' "j"i ',''

H0i'':' ! 1,r.''/ 'e'lj "* I7tI i4 -/ '''... I fl'ql,''''' ,' ' '',` 'I '' vo, 'I,% , , , ,....., .., , 01' ''.

Pri,,,,$ ! ,.v 1, 4,0, t,,4;4 11;4,14 '444 4, .,t.''r ,. ,^, 4 , ,,,

1444:: t. ' 4"

, -4PP,''4.'1 ".11%; " ''', 1 ,% 4, . '' '"" '''IV "1,1' ,1.4, T, , ..,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,4,,%: -, ';, ,,,...i, 4,, .;,,,

. ,,: ' t , ,, , 1,....1t,..k`'''''A'4'1%',:'Z''.`.' "4 ' 44'' -'','")' 'C'''' ' ',, I %`4-''.-,e)' '''' '',' '' ''-', -

;$ ,!.',i;,," ?,:;,1 :..L!:" ' ,.,42 ',' " -: t, ' ,4.',::''' ; '''.' ':,)1 ' :. . , % ,., 4 ' ,'T) ,,, -% 4 ' I ,' ' ,,, 4,Y,' ,C3:44'1',.%,;:4:,;14,4:: ,,,n i.n,l,,: t - :: :,::: - :, 'i.,,Ci'' , ;A: ,..',I :ii.:,,, i'''' '',, \ , '',''1, II,, .. i, -14 ' I ",_,

n.iki.,/ i[,'',Itl. '44.'1W, ,,0' ', ,1'', ., " , ,' f ,4':A ':':. , ,r; 4,, : :,...,"4, A '''..1,,,,,";,, 31':,.."'"",IL LI 4'; tt" %4'':,, ' 1 ''''': ..V4fr ''q ' "106441, "

4 ....y ,,.,IT!,,,,191,.1-.3.',..',"ri,+., 12'''",4J,4 ! '''P ".e44.4-:! ' , ,,. % ,,,,, . ..,, 1 , 4 ...,4,r., 44,. i ' ,.. ,,' ,t, t''.1'007.5h1141. °1'' AAA,t1-,,,t % 1 % ott t, , ,-,, e, . ,,,..i. , ,,,, 4,, _ t , tf.,..A ,

. , a .--"', , 4,-,,,i.,41,..1, -, , ! 0. .1,,tte , I.' 4.. ,,. i,1'6*, lailktg11,61'1,4ti!4 , 4 o'r' : ,4 :'4'4- 0.%;:j4 ,, 4-",,*:64 ',) 4 . r, % 04.,

...' t%,

4.4

.

A

If-

'f84.4t

-..- 7,..IMM/, ,...'..--- ,11...-

.,A

JiP

ro.

Description of the Project:

DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECTVincent Lanier, Project Director

Like every other professional in education andmost of the literate public, teachers of art andart education have been watching the recentconsistent progress of instructional tech-nology. As the media field becomes morewidespread and more inventive, some of itsimplications for art education become obvi-ous and exciting. Late in 1964 a group of arteducators developed the concept of a projectdesigned essentially to collect informationon the newer media and their impact onthe teaching of art and to disseminate thisinformation as widely as possible among themembers of the profession.

To some extent the origin and intent ofthis project paralleled the music educatorsproject of that year.' Also, since NAEA iscapable of widespread and effective dissemi-nation, the project, like that of the musiceducators, was developed as a proposal tothe USOE, sponsored by the national asso-ciation.

The proposal was submitted to the U. S.Office of Education in March, 1965. It wasapproved by the Arts and HumanitiesBranch and the Media Office of that agencyand funded under Title VII B of the Nation-al Defense Education Act for $66,044.00.Its duration was 18 months, starting May 1,1965 and ending August 81, 1966. A com-mittee made up of Edward Matti' (Pennsyl-vania State University), Herbert Burgart(George Peabody College), Kenneth Beittel(Pennsylvania State University), CharlesDorn (NAEA), Elliot Eisner (StanfordUniversity), Harlan Hoffa (U.S. Office ofEducation), Anna Hyer (Division of Audio-Visual Instruction) , C. R. Carpenter (Penn-sylvania State University), Gerald Torkel-son (University of Washington) and theProject Director assumed the responsibilityof planning the overall framework of the2

h.

project.Since the project was concerned with the

generation and accumulation of media ideasand information as these relate to the teach-ing of art, the focus of the project was seenas a symposium of 5 days length duringwhich 50 selected art educators and 4 mediaspecialists would he brought together. Byusing dependable traditional devices such asthe presentation of papers, discussion by acarefully chosen panel, intensive analysis ofparticular problems by small interest groupsand the examination of a range of existingmedia hardware and materials in art, thesymposium could and did concentrate sus-tained attention on the impact of education-al technology on the field in question.

Subsequent project activities were seenprimarily as supportite of the widest possibledissemination of ideas and information fromthe results of the symposium and all otherrelevant sources. This dissemination includ-ed visual and verbal presentations at theNAEA regional conventions and other meet-ings, and duplicated and printed materialsdeveloped by the project and published byNAEA. This project report itself is visual-ized as a dissemination vehicle.

In order to insure the greatest likelihoodof a wide dissemination of the results ofthe symposium, a broad range of levels ofart education was stipulated for participantselection. The 50 funded participants includ-ed elemenatry classroom teachers, secondaryart teachers, supervisors of art, college anduniversity art and art education teachers,researchers, and those interested in contin-uing education and museum education. Al-so, in each cam, the individual participant'scapacity for serving as a disseminator wasemphasized, both in the selection processand in his subsequent activities curing and

after the symposium. Four media specialists(Carpenter, Allen, Finn, Norberg) werechosen as people who would be able to reflectsome sensitivity for the educational role ofthe visual arts as well as superior compe-tence and imagination within the mediafield.

The kinds of issues confronted by thoseassembled at the symposium included a con-siderable variety. One type was the explora-tion of human learning and developmentand the reciprocal impact of such investi-gation on both fields. While art educationis poorly (and some might say properly so)represented in the structures of theories oflearning and instruction, educational tech-nology is very heavily indebted to theseareas for conceptual support. The reviewof the implications of the intellectual ori-gins of the media field was done by C. R.Carpenter in the first paper.

A second area of concern was the growingmass of research in the media field and itsrelevance to art education. In particularthose studies which investigated visualphenomena can, and in some instances do,provide material with which the art educa-tor can more readily understand the dynam-ics of his own field. A further considera-tion in this area is the possibility that re-search in art education can shed some lighton the problems which media students faceboth on a theoretical and on a practical level.While this was not found to be the caseduring this project, by no means have allpotential relationships of this nature beenfully explored. William Allen presented apaper on this second issue.

A third kind of issue was examined byJames Finn. This had to do with the exist-ing hardware of media, its proper logisticaland administrative handling, and how both

3

these factors can exert influence on the teach-ing of art. Although those in educationaltechnology are quick and correct to pointout that the machine aspect of the field isnot its only present or potential contribu-tiOn, there is no doubt that much of the sig-nificance of the field for art education, orfor any curriculum area, is dependent upona proper exploitation of technological devel-opments. For this purpose, the kind of stim-ulus which can grow out of exchanges ofinformation during a prolonged confronta-tion is of great and unique value. Oftenthe benefits derived from the experience forlater speculation and development cannotbe readily observed at the close of the periodof confrontation, or, for that matter, maynever be recognized as the source of a sub-sequent step forward. James Finn's pres-entation at the project symposium is omit-ted in this report due to its essentially visualnature. His approach to media problems,however, is well represented in the paneldiscussion portion of this document.

The last speaker, Kenneth Norberg, wasgiven the task of projecting present tenden-cies in media as they relate to art educationin the near as well as distant future. Insome instances, the most imaginative extra-polation may provoke the most practical con-sequences. This is perhaps most true in re-lating areas of consideration which have upto that point been reasonably discrete.

Building upon the conceptual and infor-mational bases established by the mediaspecialists in their prepared papers, thepanel discussion, in which media and arteducation people could develop a spontane-ous dialogue, extended the intensive analy-sis of problems and issues. Here, the arteducator had a structured opportunity totap the rich storehouse of knowledge each4

of the media specialists brought to the sym-posium and to explore each point with con-siderable thoroughness. The panel discus-sion, including comments and questions fromthe audience, is presented almost in its en-tirety in this report. It is interesting to notethat chalk aging and insightful questionscame from the media people to the art edu-cators as well as in the opposite direction,as had been anticipated. While it is un-doubtedly gratifying to witness the highlevel of interest and awareness of those out-side the field in the problems of art education, one might wish that the professionhad a greater body of sophisticated theoryand reliable findings with which to answerthose questions. Some solace can be derivedfrom the fact that both thoughtful analysisand empirical investigation are new to thehistory of art education as compared to mostother disciplines. Nevertheless, the questionsof an alert and critical outsider can dispelany tendencies towards complacency, a re-sult fortunately most conducive to furtherthought and action.

Following the transcript of the panel dis-cussion are the reports of the four groupseminars. These groups, formed on the basisof teaching level, were composed of (I) ele-mentary and secondary teachers; (2) super-visors ; (3) art educators in higher education ;and (4) art educators representing researchinterests. The reports were developed as adistillation of from four to seven hours ofgroup discussion, during which time theknowledge and stimulus absorbed from thepresented papers, the panel and the exposureto films, media devices, and media materialssuch as slides, filmstrips, and paperbackbooks could be filtered through teachinglevel and individual situation requirements.The lack of a commonality of format among

the reports should indicate the relative re-straint of this symposium on the matterof structuring of approach. Though a cer-tain rigidity of structure in such groupsituations usually promotes efficiency, it mayalso inhibit the latitude of ideas surveyedand may deny easy access to unusual ideas.

The final symposium document represent-ed in this report is the evaluation summarywritten and presented at the meeting bythe project evaluator. In it the evaluatorreviews the content and procedure of thesymposium with respect to an assessment oftheir effectiveness. The last section of thisreport attempts to bring together the majorproblems in the uses of newer media by arteducation and some recommendations as tofuture activities which may expand and re-fine these uses. While a substantial portionof the ideas in this last section stem directlyfrom the materials accumulated during thesymposium, some ideas reflect other aspectsof project activity. Also, it must be notedthat this section ultimately represents thesummation of one person, the author. Need-less to say, every effort has been made toprovide a thorough and impartial abstractof the ideas and information brought tolight during the lifetime of the project.Nonetheless, some degree of judgment mustof necessity be exercised in such a task, ifonly in providing greater emphasis to someissues over others.

A few details of the project symposiumwhich do not appear elsewhere in this re-port might be worthy of presentation here.The symposium was held during the weekof December 13-17, 1965 in the NationalEducation Association Center in Washing-ton, D.C. The 50 participants were madeup of 15 classroom teachers, 15 supervisors,10 college teachers and 10 researchers. They

were selected from among 201 applicantsaccording to criteria such as geographicallocation, teaching level, media backgroundand dissemination capability. There were al-so 56 observers in attendance, 19 of thempresent all 5 days. During the symposium,53 films and one videotape were screened ;21 pieces of media equipment were exhibit-ed; and 38 filmstrips and a number of slides,tapes, discs, paperback books, reproductions,programmed learning sequences, 8mm loopfilms, transparencies and museum exhibitswere displayed. The program provided 11hours of taped lecture and discussion, inaddition to the many hours of unrecordedcommittee discussions.

Although none of the many disseminationactivities of the project are shown in thisreport, they should, at least, be describedhere since the primary concern of the legis-lation under which the project was fundedis dissemination of media information. Thedissemination procedure with the greatestimpact was probably the multi-media (slide-film-talk) presentation given by the ProjectDirector and appearing as part of the pro-gram of each of the four NAEA RegionalConventions? As part of that presentation,photographs and motion picture film takenat the symposium, along with slides donatedby the exhibitors, were put together into afive-minute film by Robert Beeching. Thisfilm was reduced to 8mm and cartridgedwithout charge by Technicolor. A rough es-timate of the number of people who sawthe presentation both at the four regionalmeetings and at other conferences where itwas given would be between 500 and 600.The cartridged film on standard 8mm is nowavailable through the NAEA.

The next substantial attempt at dissemina-tion was the April 1966 issue of the official

5

NAEA Journal, Art Education, which wasdevoted to newer media and featured nineillustrated articles on facets of the projectand its subject. A further step, designed toprovide a basic pool of information on avail-able media resources for the profession, wasthe project's development for publication byNAEA of the following documents :

1) Films on Art (compiled by AlfredHumphrys and expanded by the project),published December 1965.

2) Slides and Filmstrips on Art (includ-ing 8mm loop films; and transparencies), inpress.

8) Printed Materials on Art (includingreproductions and paperback books), inpress.

Whatever one's personal opinion may bewith respect to the desirability of usingnewer media in the teaching of art, it wouldbe difficult to deny that this profession,along with all of education, appears to bemoving increasingly in that direction. Thereare those who regret this development andtheir concerns and integrity must be respect-ed if we are to maintain the intellectualdignity and freedom we prize so highly. Onthe other hand, it would appear that a con-siderable majority of art educators welcomethe newer media as tools which, when usedjudiciously, can improve the teaching of art.In this anise the project can be viewed as anattempt by the national association and thefederal government to help art educationto turn one of the several corners it needsand now wants to turn.

NOTES

1. National Conference on the Uses of EducationalMedia in the Teaching of Music, sponsored byMENC and USOE, December 7-11, 1964.

.2. Dates and places of these meetings were:Eastern Regional, Boston, March 16-19; WesternRegional, Houston, April 2-7; Pacific Regional,Asilomar, California, April 3-6; Southeastern Re-gional, Tallahassee, April 24 -27.,

6

THE NEWER MEDIA AND EDUCATION IN THE ARTSC. R. Carpenter, Pennsylvania State University

The time and place are most favorable forthis symposium on the Uses of Newer Mediain Art Education. At this time especiallythere is a rapidly growing interest and muchactivity in all of the different forms andvarieties of the arts. Yearly, increasingthousands of people, professionals, amateurs,and just common people, actively begin toparticipate in some form of the graphicand fine arts. The number of people, whetherthey are producers or consumers, creatorsor appreciators, escalates yearly, perhaps inan increasing ratio to population growth.This place is also propitious for our planneddiscourses on media, methods, potentials,e "A possibilities for education in the arts.here there exists the new National Artsand Humanities Foundation established atlong last to counterbalance the NationalScience Foundation. Here, too, exist sourcesof federal leadership, support, and encour-agement for creative new developments inthe arts, developments far greater in scopeand purpose than we would have dared imag-ine prior to the formulation of the doc-trine of the New Frontier and the GreatSociety. This is a good time and place forour deliberations and discussions.

The main taskThe task before us is formidable and ex-

ceedingly complex. We probably have asense of helping to launch new enterprisesfor education in the arts. Although old andwith deep roots in human biological originsand human history, these aspects of educa-tion, nevertheless, have much that is newlyemerging. Similarly, the "newer" media ofcommunication and of instruction are at thedawn of their development. Most media,whether they essentially involve films, tapes,or electronic waves, are in that stage when8

their novelty is attractive to some people butrepellent to others. New or old, art forms orprocesses and the media are ubiquitous incontemporary society. Whether we speakfrom the viewpoints of the arts or of themedia relative to education, learning, andtraining, much of our insecurity and un-certainty derive from our recent arrivalswherever we are.

I judge that the main task of this sym-posium is to explore as deeply and as sys-tematically as possible the useful potentiali-ties and possibilities of the "newer" mediaor serving, advancing, and improving theefforts of those who teach and of those wholearn in the arts. If this be the main objec-tive of the conference, then I would suggestthat all explorations involve risks of failureand that complete success is rare. We mayexpect some successes and more failures inour attempts to see the potential and possiblefits and adaptations of the newer media andlearning to the skills of artists, or of theactivities of anyone involved in artistic oraesthetic behavior.

The task before us, as I understand thattask, is not to resolve the conceptual androle conflicts between different people orgroups of people in the broad field of educa-tion for the arts. Let us think about andspeak to a broad and diverse audience :those who train young children to see colors,forms, perspectives; those who teach teach-ers how to teach artistic literacy to increas-ing millions of young students ; those whotrain the talented elite to the highest levelsof excellence in artistic performances ; orthose who communicate with and throughboth the media of the arts and the "newer"media of communication, and seek to raisethe levels of taste in the arts of vast adultpopulations.

Let us not, as we proceed to explore thereciprocal interactions between the trainingin the arts, draw boundary lines betweenthe producers and consumers, the sendersand the receivers, the processes of creatingor producing and the processes of perceiving,analyzing, criticizing, and understanding.Let us not divide that which is best leftwhole, or analyze that which most needs syn-thesis and integration.

Some objectives of education in artIf I read correctly what educators in the

arts and related fields have written, themany purposes of instruction, training, andlearning are represented by the following :

To learn to perceive;To learn to discriminate in terms of ap-

propriate value scales and judgements amongartistic performances and products;

To learn different kinds of aesthetic per-formances with different materials and artmedia;

To learn the skills of expression in selectedforms, structures, and materials;

To guide individuals into levels of free-dom of performance and personal integra-tion which result from mastery of materialsand techniques;

To instruct the artistically illiterate so asto increase the levels of aesthetic literacy ;

To wage educational campaigns againstubiquitous ugliness in the appearance andbehavior of people and in the environmentswhich men both create and destroy ;

To train the artistically talented elite to-ward the limits of excellence in specializedperformances;

To provide reservoirs of art products andperformances which can be appreciated andenjoyed by large numbers of deserving peo-ple.

It is perhaps presumptuous for me to at-tempt to state a set of objectives for educa-tors in the arts or for art educators.' I donot expect these statements to be accepted.I have made these points as a consequenceof some frustration I experienced aftersearching the literature and finding manyconflicts and contradictions in what the ob.jectives are or should be. Also, I have madethese points to show the need for such state-ments before we can intelligently discussthe uses of "newer" media in art education.In fact, it would be desirable, and will even-tually be necessary, to restate these objec-tives, making them more specific and phras-ing them to require clearly defined and testa-ble performances.

The purposes of this paper

The purposes which I hope to serve withthis initial presentation are the following:

To begin to set the stage for followingdiscussions by outlining general problemsand propositions which relate to the inter-actions of education in the arts and the de-velopment and uses of the "newer" media ;

To begin a series of definitions of areas,language, and processes which may later beof service in our discussions, here and else-where;

To begin to outline the possible roles anduses of the "newer" media as we strive tosee these means for assisting art educatorsto accomplish their defined and acceptedobjectives.

Finally, I shall not hesitate from time totime to state unanswered questions or un-solved problems which need answering orsolving, and which may interest educatorsin the arts as areas of reserach and devel-opment.

9

Areas of discourse

It seems that we are involving ourselvesin three general areas of discourse: the be-havioral sciences, art and aesthetic contin-gencies, and the "newer" media. Each ofthese fields is most complex and each lacksa common conceptualization, a common lan-guage, and a unity of purposes. The areasare not pure disciplines, for each can bereduced to more specific and perhaps funda-mental areas or lines of study and scholar-ship. Since the areas of subject matter, ofacademic and professional efforts, of sciencesand arts are pluralistic and are discussed inmany languages, how are we to manage ourefforts at interdisciplinary discourse so thatit will be most stimulating and productive?

I propose, as a partial solution to thisproblem, to state two sets of generalizations,one deriving from the behavioral sciencesand the other from the field of the media.The generalizations will not be on the samelevels of abstraction or of the same scope.They will vary greatly in the degree to whichevidence can be found to support them ;hence, some may be classed as hypotheses,other are assumptions, and still others aspropositions. All may be classed as theoriesof some variety or kind. Perhaps none ofthe statements can be called dependable con-clusions. All of the statements have beenselected, by means of a mysterious personallogic, from a wide ravngo of alternatives.The generalizations that follow are time-,space-, and person-limited. Each deservesand, it is hoped, will provoke both discus-sion and disputation.

Some pertinent generalizationsfrom the behavioral sciences

The human organism is the product of10

genetic determinants, adaptability of thisorganism, and organism-environment selec-tivity operating over much time ;

The organic adaptability of the humanorganism is supplemented by the capacitiesfor learning and the operation of vast net-works of learning processes ;

Genetic assortments and transmission ofgene-determiners are paralleled by learningthe latter most specifically provides themechanisms for cultural transmission ;

Changes in the rate and patterns of genet-ic transmission from generation to genera-tion are relatively slow compared with rateand pattern changes which are mediated bylearning and the resulting culture;

A most conspicuous characteristic ofevolved human behavior is that it acts onand modifies the environment, and thusbrings environmental demands within theranges of man's adaptive capabilities ;

The human organism's exceptional capac-ities lie in those modalities of speech andcommunication;

Play is a universal modality of behavior inyoung mammals, and play and recreationalbehavior continue on a reduced basisthroughout the life cycles of most humans.

In summaryLearning cultural differentiation and cul-

tural transmission, language and communi-cations, construction and destruction, playand recreational investments of surplus ener-gies provide the organic behavioral milieufor the arts;

Different cultures and sub-cultures whenisolated from each other always developdistinctive forms of communications, pat-terns, of actions on and interactions withthe environment, and distinctive, more orless depending on degree and time of separa-

tion, forms of play and the expenditure ofsurplus energies.Differences and similarities :

The variabilities of the organic, personalbehavioral and cultural or group behavioralcharacteristics are among the most conspic-uous features of man and his societies. Thus-ly viewed, that behavior which relates toart as performance or art as a product hasa basis in those biosocial processes and forces(energizing mechanisms and ways of invest-ing energies) which are fundamental to allhuman evolution and human activities.Hence, artistic activities may well be viewedas integral and essential and not as peri-pheral and nonessential components of hu-man society. Artistic activities like scienti-fic and technological activities surely haveadaptive values for human populations.

Generally it seems to be agreed that theorganic as well as the inorganic matter-energy systems operate deterministicallyand in ways described by probability mathe-matics. It remains to be learned whetherthe descriptive principles of aesthetics orthe imaginatively creative variabilities of artare also subject to deterministic systemsthat are as compelling and limiting; orwhether more freedom does and should pre-vail in this domain of the arts than in thesciences and technologies.

These generalizations are oriented tophylogenetic evolution. There can be an-other set of generalizations which are closerto the work of educators in the arts andwhich are oriented to the ontogenetic orindividual development and life cycle. Letus observe the following possible examples :

Young children must both mature andlearn the processes of perceiving, of usingall the senses for discriminating colors,

forms, objects, motion, persons as well asinteractions and relationships.

The maturation schedule and the corres-ponding learning schedule or rates can becharted for an individual child, and normscan be statistically charted for populationsof children in a relatively homogeneous cul-ture or sub-culture.

It would appear to be a reasonable hy-pothesis that there are maturational stageswhen instruction is most appropriate andlearning most productive; when these mat-urational stages are missed instructionalefforts are ineffective, and learning is mostdifficult and stops short of the optimumlevels of achievement for the individualchild. For example, the capacity of youngchildren for learning languages changes inaccordance with this hypothesis.

The response to art objects, the apprecia-tion or undertaking of the language of art,as well as performace of the skills of anart, are interdependent with the growth-maturational schedule of an individual.

The growth schedule of an individual in-cludes both organic and sociocultural fac-tors. For example, the aesthetically illiter-ate adult of thirty-five apparently has lowpossiblities of ever learning to appreciatenonobjective painting or the music of a mod-ernistic symphony.

The individual's artistic behavior varieswith maturational and growth factors. Thisbehavior also varies with both general andspecial abilities, and the educator in the artsmay urgently need to take into account thespecial artistic abilities of students.

Questions of importance in this connec-tion are the following : What can and shouldbe done to train the majority of people of apopulation who lack potentials for moderate

11

or advanced levels of artistic performancesand the perception, discrimination, under-standing and appreciation of the arts? Howcan the artistic literacy of a whole peoplebe raised?

I have attempted to formulate a fewgeneralizations to illustrate a biosocial ap-proach to providing a rational basis forartistic behavoir, and to propose that artis-tic behavoir is as basic and fundamentalas are other modalities of behavior. Thesegeneralizations, although they are a low or-der of theory, may nevertheless providesome concepts for discussion and perhapssome guidelines for different kinds of in-struction in education for the arts.Audio-visual theory

No coherent audio-visual theory seems tohave been derived from the behavioralsciences. There have been a few spuriousattempts to formulate such theories. Thebasic, nontheoretical facts are that humanshave sensory-perceptive capacities whichpermit responses to different kinds of energychanges such as heat, sound and light waves,contact, pressure and kinesthesia, and thechemical senses of taste and smell. Themany senses of the human being, actingas separate modalities or in combination,depend on the characteristics of the stimu-lus situation ; they provide possibilities andalso limits to the ways the individual canreact to his environment or to materialswhich are formed as arts.

In the context of these facts the roles andfunctions of the media of communicationand instruction (I object to classing theseas "audio-visual") are the following:Examples:

1. To represent to the person in varying12

degrees of realism-to-abstractions, i.e., onthe semantic continuum, stimulus materialsfor reactions, interactions, response, learn-ing and transformation, Usually these rep-resentations are selected and organized forspecial effects and purposes.

2. To capture a stimulus situation andpreserve it for repeated use.

3. To represent stimulus situations so asto bring visual and auditory phenomenato restructure them for emphasis, or indeedwithin sensory limits.

Viewed thusly, the media under consider-ation are plastic, pliable, and dynamic meansof recording, selecting, organizing and pre-senting or displaying materials of manykinds and qualities. These acts can be donefor many purposes. Media can be used topreserve and store information, to serve ascarriers of information in diffusion or dis-semination operations, to provide pleasingorganizations and sequences of patterns ofstimulation, or, finally, to provide conditionsbelieved to be favorable for learning. Thislast function, especially, relates closely to theinterest of the educator in the arts.

Media and modes of communications

In descriptions and discussions of com-munications and media it is useful to dis-tinguish modes of stimulus materials fromthe media. The modes of communicationlie closer to the form and structure of theinformation being conveyed. For example,in films the photographic or graphic modesmay be used. The photographic mode maybe further broken down into still or motion,and color or monochromatic. The mediumcould have been video tape rather than film.The modality of sound can be "encoded,"

stored, and transported by films or tapes ;but while the sound records when activatedmay be of speech or music, the differentmodes of stimulation were carried by thesame medium.

This analysis can be carried further. Theelements of the modes of expression, stimu-lus, or communication could be described interms of signs, signals, symbols, or evennoise. Various linguistic or "informationtheory" analyses, also, could be used. Al-though interesting and important, theseanalyses are probably, at this time, not veryhelpful to the art educator.

Let us revert to a point : namely, that themedia and modes of stimulus materials aremeans of arrangi g conditions favorablefor learning. The pervasive and importantbehavioral phenomena of organic adaptationand individual learning are especially con-tingent, or even central, to all aspects of arteducation. We could wish that a finite num-ber of theoretical propositions, "laws," or"principles" describing learning, could bestated and be useful to art educators.have chosen to state a series of operationalguidelines rather than present very abstractgeneral theories?

1. What is to be learned by whom andwhen are judgments that must be made inrelation to the relevant characteristics ofthe learner (s) ?

2. The broad condition of motivation iscontingent to learning; however, motiva-tional states are complex in kind and varyin degree. Motivation may be general, aswith the achievement motive, or specific,as when a learner acts so as to have the ap-proval of a respected person.

3. Reinforcement of both the positive andnegative kinds operates, in specific ways

relative to specific performances, to establishor extinguish learning activities of manykinds.

4. Rewards that are positive, favorable,pleasant, and encouraging are usually moreeffective as regulators of learning than re-wards (or reinforcements) that are nega-tive, unfavorable, and unpleasant. Successis more motivating than failure, althoughboth results can influence the dynamics ofhuman learning. The personalist factorsneed to be considered here. What does suc-cess and failure mean in terms of the imageof the learner of himself, and what are theeffects of achievement on social statuses?

5. Pers I nalized instrinsic or internallysymbolized rewards and reinforcements arepreferable to external rewards, especiallywhen the latter are inappropriate to thelearner's accepted values and personal frameof reference.

6. Tolerances for failures and fitting re-actions to success need to be learned, and animportant element to control is the success-failure ratios, with successes greatly pre-dominating over failures (perhaps 9 to 1).

7. The learner needs to set realistic goalsfor himself and to define feasible levels ofachievement and performances.

8. The personal history of learners andtheir established (learned) attitudes to-wards teachers, peers, and others important-ly and persistently influences what islearned and at what rate.

9. Active participation and responses ofthe right kind strengthen learning morethan passive attitudes. Active and passivestates should not be confused with covertand overt responses.

10. Organized and meaningful materialsand tasks, those that are significant to theindividual, are favorable and have positive

13

effects on complex learning.11. Repetitive practice is necessary for

many kinds of learning, but the amount ofpractice required varies with the tasks andlearning objectives or criteria.

12. Learning performances, when as-sessed or evaluated as the performances oc-cur, can be powerful sources of reinforce-ment for the learner. This is in the areaof the cybernetics of learning.

13. Spaced or distributed practice and re-call affect the retention of skills and infor-mation.

14. Differentiations and discriminationsare learned to those degrees that they arefunctional and useful to the individual, andthat they are reinforced by the cultural con-text.

15. The utility of learning may be in-creased by stimulus materials and instruc-tional situations which simulate or are simi-lar to stn ulus situations which will operateon the learned performances.

16. Relevant previous learning, attitudes,and "expectations" are close contingenciesto new learning.

17. In Gestalt terms, ground-figure dif-ferentiations or discriminations, and theneeds to complete a composition or task, op-erate positively to sustain effortful learning.

These operational statements are simplyone set of possible guides for arranging con-ditions for the acquisition of new concepts,language (symbols), skills, attitudes, andvalue norms. The statements are not closelyintegrated ; they are drawn from the associ-ationist, Gestalt, behavioristic, and condi-tioning perspectives of psychology. Markedrevisions would occur were the statementsto be made expressive of and consistentwith "programming" doctrine.14

771111.117.!"11011,11ellivill,

Programmed instructionThe eventual net residues of program-

ming prescriptions are likely to be the fol-lowing:

1. The requirement to specific preciselythe performance results that are expectedand to validate these results constantly.

2. The application of procedures of rein-forcing learning by providing informationand "feedback" on successes, approxima-tions, and failures or errors.

3. The use of "small" (or, better, opti-mum) steps in organizinf, the training pro-cedures and of sequence the steps, units,and blocks of training in orders which leadto the required performances.

4. Programmed instruction will empha-size the importance of the rate of present-ing new steps and units of instructionalmaterials. Related to this is the need toconsider the "concept load" of the instruc-tion, the levels of difficulty of the materialsrelative to previously learned performances.

5. Finally, programming procedures, willprovide for much needed * sting of achieve-ment as learning progresses, and for the vali-dation of instruction or learning.

We can predict that the contributions ofprogrammed instructional methods andtechniques will eventually merge into theslowly growing body of knowledge aboutlearning, its characteristics and require-ments of control and management.

The prescriptions of programmed learningare not exhaustive; they do not describe allof the necessary conditions for all the kindsand levels of learning. Step and unit size,pacing, the kind of responses related tokinds of learning tasks, and kinds of rein-forcement are all subareas that invite re-search and additional interpretations.

.1- .

Earlier, when programmed learning ap-peared to be the great revolutionary dis-covery that would solve many educationalproblems, programmed materials and teach-ing machines were confused. It was an oddturn of history that the key p blicists ofthe programming movement were not pro-fessionals in the media fields. Accordingly,there was a burst of efforts to invent, make,and sell teaching machines. The real func-tions of teaching machines were less ana-lyzed than the features relating to market-ing and buyer appeals. When it was realizedthat teaching machines functioned essen-tially to control the presentation of stimu-lus materials or "frames," to provide forpacing a d sequencing, and to provide forreinforcement, then existing media likestripfilms with sound, loop films, sound mo-tion pictures, audio and even video tapescould be adapted for a great range of train-ing casks employing some of the best fea-tures of programmed instruction. The bar-rier to the development, a developmentwhich involved the hybridization of pro-grammed instruction and the "newer" me-dia, was the assumed requirement that indi-viduals learned best at their own rate. Thisis like saying that an individual's readingspeed is the best rate. When modificationof this requirement was shown to be accept-able, two important consequences becamerealizable. First, it was seen that pro-grammed instruction could be used withmany types of the "newer" media. And sec-ond, it was realized that large groups oflearners could be instructed by films, tapes,radio, and television.*

Learning principles and operationalguidelines relate to the development, pro-duction, testing and use of instructional-learning materials and appropriate media.

These guidelines can be used in the sameways that blueprints and building specifi-cations are used in the building of a home.The parallels between designing conditionsfor learning and designing a home to livein are close and suggestive.

Barriers to the uses of the "newer" mediaWhy have the "newer" media been so

little used by educators in the arts? Thisis a good question for discussion, but shallI suggest a few conditions that seem rightto me? The arts have enough media prob-lems as presented by traditional or new ap-proaches to the arts. Artists are alwaysstriving for qualities that are often modi-fied or reduced by many of the "newer"media. This deterioration of quality is oftenvery objectionable to the sensitive artists ineducation. Most visual media have limita-tions for presenting the works of arts andperformances in the full dimensions ofspace. The apparatus of the media are of-ten barriers to their use. With increasingcomplications of media and media systems,those who use them for instruction mustsurrender much control to the engineers andnonacademic media specialists. This loss ofcontrol is especially objectionable to the cre-ating artist or to the art student. In manyart media tactile and kinesthetic sensorymodes are brought to bear, and these sen-sory modes are not included in the audio-visual media. The problem of when distantobservations should be supplemented byperformance has not been solved.

This list can best be extended by artistsand those who teach art. Finally, I suggestthat many of the objectives and blocks tothe use of the "newer" instructional mediaresult from the lack of intent or skills formastering the media, for molding and us-

15

hilt them for deserving instructional pur-poses, and of using them successfully.

The great fault to be found in the selec-tion, adaptation, and use of media in arteducation is that we have not taken full ad-vantages of all the possibilities. We havenot systematically assessed, for example,how motion pictures or television could beused advantageously to show students theircorrect and incorrect performances ; in moretechnical terms, to provide "feedback" to thelearner. We have not made for use in edu-cation enough detailed, recorded models ofthe performances of talented artists to pro-vide the kinds of models from which stu-dents can learn. Why, indeed, have we notused the distributive media to raise the levelsof artistic literacy of millions of people inthis country or in the world? The poten-tialities and possibilities of sound strip filmsfor making accessible the art treasures ofmuseums such as those we have here inWashington remain largely to be exploited.Extraordinary opportunities lie ahead, andwe need to find and take advantage of them.

A proposalIn conclusion, I propose that educators in

the arts establish a joint commission of art-ist educators, learning psychologists (withprofessional status in the media also) , andmedia specialists to plan and propose a spe-cial national laboratory, dedicated to theexploration and development of the "newer"media for instruction and public educationin the arts.

This laboratory may follow a small modelof such a facility that was developed at ThePennsylvania State University during theearly years of this decade. The purpose ofthe proposed National Art Education andMedia Laboratory would be to conduct re-16

search and development programs on realis-tic problems of the producing and testing ofsignificant blocks of instruction for studentsat all levels and the public. The empiricalmethods that have been demonstrated shouldbe employed-generally in the Laboratory, orperhaps artists would prefer to use the term`research studio.' In the research studio awide spectrum of research on students'learning of varied concepts and diverseskills of an art area would be beautifully com-bined with actual course-curriculum devel-opment and the production of public pro-grams especially for television. This courseof action provides a reasonable and produc-tive alternative to the conventional commit-tee-conference-discussion procedures forplanning courses of instruction and curric-ulums. Given funds that are now available,the proposal for a national studio laboratoryis practical and has proven potentials forproviding evidence and useful materialswhich will answer many of the questionsthat this conference can raise, but probablycannot answer at this time because of theneed for more evidence.

REFERENCES

1. Art Education. The Sixty-Fourth Yearbook ofthe National Society for the Study of Education,1965. Editors: W. Reid Hastie and Herman G.Richey; distributed by The University of ChicagoPress, Chicago, Illinois.2. Adopted from Ernest R. Hilgard, Theories ofLearning, 2nd ed., Appleton-Century Crofts, Inc.,1956, pp. 486-487. A Summary of the Lake OkohojiAudiovisual Leadership Conference, 1960-1964, pp.35-36.3. Carpenter, C. R. and Greenhill, L. P., Compara-tive Research on Methods and Media for PresentingProgrammed Courses in Mathematics and English,The Pennsylvania State University, Division ofInstructional Services, Carnegie Building, Univer-sity Park, Pennsylvania, 1963, p. 74.

RESEARCH IN INSTRUCTIONAL MEDIA AND ART EDUCATIONWilliam H. Allen, University of Southern California

The questions that come to mind immediate-ly when we consider the application of re-search in the instructional media to the en-gagement in the process of artistic creationor the teaching of this process are : "Whatare the objectives of art education"? and"What, if anything, is unique about arteducation as distinguished from other kindsof learning experiences?"

The message from art education literaturereveals that the particular set with whichthe art educator approaches his task is bas-ically expressive and emotional ; that is,it is anti-mechanical. Thus, there is a built-in obstacle to the acceptance and applica-tion of audio-visual media research, for theartist's perception of machine-mediated in-structional materials is that they somehowdehumanize and mechanize the learningor, in the case of art, the creative process.It is true that there are some potentiallydehumanizing overtones to the entire tech-nological direction of our society ; yet, if weinclude the process of educating in our soci-ety, the automatization of much of teachingis a predictable conclusion.

The general problem we are directing our-selves to is that of searching for ways tooptimize the teaching of art. The morespecific intent of the paper is the determi-nation of applications of audio-visual mediaresearch to art education. By "audio-visualmedia research" we mean the systematicstudy of such materials and devices as motionpicture films, fihistrips and slides, projectedtransparencies, television, programmed in-struction and teaching machines, textbookillustrations, exhibits, simulators, multi-me-dia presentations, and computer-assisted in-struction. This paper will consider the appli-cation of such research to the responseslearners make to instructional materials,

confining itself to the evidence from theresearch rather than reporting on the over-all field of application of audio-visual mediato the teaching of art.

Instructional media researchand the art educator

How do learners respond to audio-visualmedia ? Do these responses differ accordingto the characteristics of the materials used?Do they differ according to the individualcharacteristics of the learners? Are the gen-eralizations from the research applicable toeducation in art? The art educator seeks an-swers to these questions when he prepareshimself for the most efficacious use of in-structional media.

Learner responses to instructional mediaThe main conclusions from research on

the application of instructional media is thatlearners respond to them in a positive wayand that such materials may, dependingupon the conditions of use and the nature ofthe learning task, in fact enhance learning.However, there is nothing magic about thefilm or television or the teaching machine ingeneral. No mode of instructional presenta-tion has general superiority over the othersonly an advantage, if any, as it resultsfrom the specific requirements of all aspectsof the learning situation : the educationalobjective being served, the content beingtaught, the nature of the learner, the taskbeing performed, the affective conditionsprevailing at the time.

The supportable facts regarding researchon comparisons of the different techniquesof instruction show that the instructionalmedia are effective in presenting factual in-formation or in the actual presentation ofstimulus material to be learned (1), and

17

the art educator can use the audio-visualmedia with confidence. In fact, you havebeen prodigious users of the projected slidefor just this purpose. There is also evidencethat the motion picture film particularly isan effective medium for the presenting ofmodels for emulation where motor skilllearning is involved (1). Television hasbeen an efficient carrier of instruction towidely dispersed groups and individualswithout apparent loss of instructional effec-tiveness, but there is no evidence that tele-vised instruction results in increased learn-ing (4,17). Programmed instruction, also,promises to become a potent teaching in-strument when it breaks the shackles of itspresent somewhat sterile form and appliesits sound psychological principles to themodification of other instructional media.

The evidence is, therefore, clear. The in-structional media are effective, even neces-sary, teaching instruments. Their applica-tion can extend over the range of art teach-ing objectives. And they may be used undercertain conditions to vitalize instruction.But what are these conditions? And whatare the specific instructional media indi-cated by them?

Characteristics of the inetructional mediaThe key to the selection of the appropri-

ate instructional media to use in any par-ticular teaching situation is the relative ef-fectiveness of that medium in accomplishingthe desired educational objective. In otherwords, given a specific instructional goal,what is the best means of reaching it? In-terestingly enough, in education there islittle experimental evidence to point the wayfor the making of these instructional deci-sions. This is true at every level of teachingand in every subject matter area. It is true18

in the teaching of art, and it is true in theapplication of audio-visual instructionalmedia to the teaching process. Gagne andBolles observed, "relatively little of a sys-tematic nature is known about how to pro-mote efficient learning in practical situa-tions" (9). And Gage stated that "the lim-ited usefulness of learning theory in educa-tion has long been acknowledged" (6).This does not mean, of course, that we knownothing about selecting appropriate mediafor instruction in specific tasks. It isjust that this knowledge has not been sys-tematically organized into a useable set ofoperational procedures that might be ap-plied to the teaching of art.

Over the entire range of art teaching youhave, at Zifferent times, a variety of educa-tional objectives. We will not argue therelative merits of the objectives in this pa-per, for this is your responsibility as arteducators, and your literature is filled withdiscussions of this problem. Our task here isto relate the audio-visual instructional med-ia to the accomplishment of these variousobjectives. This is a difficult task and hasnever been systematically applied to instruc-tional media selection for art education. Sothe following attempt must be treated asvery tentative at this time. It is presentedhere in the hope that art teachers will drawfrom it suggestions for instructional mediaimplementation and not as a fully devel-oped guideline to be arbitrarily applied tothe selection of instructional materials. InTable 1 a very rough and preliminary rat-ing is given for the effectiveness of differentinstructional media types when used to ac-complish six different learning objectives.It is suggested that this evaluative grid beused jointly with the following explanationof the media-objectives relationships. Those

teachers who want to obtain a more com-prehensive background in the determinationof learning objectives and their relationshipsto instructional techniques are referred tothe writing of Gagne (7,8) and Mager (19).

1. Learning factual information. Thisinformation such as names, dates, event,terms, definitions, etc., all of which haveconcrete referents. In the teaching of artthese might include such tasks as learningthe facts of art history, terminology, orfacts about art media.

An abundance of audio-visual media re-search points to the effectiveness of films,filmstrips, television, and programmed in-struction in meeting this educational objec-tive (1). Unfortunately, however, althoughthe research indicates that these audio-visualmaterials are effective, it does not tell usspecifically what types of audio-visual me-dia are indicated under what kinds of teach-ing conditions. That is, we have no evidencethat would help us choose from a variety ofmaterials that particular instructional me-dium that would be most effective. At thisstage of our knowledge, one might concludethat the use of films, projected still pictures,television, and programmed instruction inthe presentation of factual information addslittle to student learning, and they areprobably no more effective than such con-ventional types as print and oral presenta-tion. On the other hand, films and projectedstill pictures do contribute greatly to theinterest level of learners and provide a use-ful variety in the teaching. It should bepointed out that television is a carrier of in-formation to the learner and probably pos-sesses no particular characteristic that wouldmake it more effective than any other in-structional medium in teaching factual in-

formation. The characteristics of the tele-vision image are identical to that of soundmotion picture image, but with significantdegradation in picture quality. The educa-tional differences between the sound motionpicture and television are those related tothe method of image display, the controlthat can be exercised by the teacher in usingthem, and the system of distribution of theimages. From the standpoint of the teach-ing function, they appear to be the same.(However, Marshall McLuhan (20) woulddisagree, claiming that television is a differ-ent medium with different instructionalcharacteristics just because of such fea-tures as degraded image and difference indisplay.) Research with programmed in-struction (22, 23) indicates that factual in-formation may be efficiently taught withteaching machines or programmed textbooks,but not necessarily more so than with otherinstructional methods. The use of three-dimensional objects or demonstrations prob-ably is of little instructional value in thelearning of facts as such.

2. Learning visual identification. Thislearning task will involve the use of visualcues to discriminate one element from an-other and will require the identification andnaming of objects, words, or symbols. Thistype of task is one of the most common per-formed by human beings. In the teachingof art it might include such tasks as identi-fying shapes and forms, learning the char-acteristics of different art forms, recogniz-ing works of art, "seeing" the various visualaspects of the environment, or discriminat-ing among different shades and tones ofcolors. It would be expected that this learn-ing objective would play a significant rolein art education.

It has been shown that in instructional19

situations where the initial presentationstimulus is similar to the performance or be-havior in the final task to be learned, highpositive transfer will occur (2,9,12,16,21).It is to be expected that such a conditionwould prevail in the learning of visual dis-criminations in art education. This meansthat the stimulus representations of the as-sociations to be learned should be made asmuch like the stimuli in the performance orbehavior in the final task as possible. It isapparent that conventional printed or lec-tured verbal stimuli have only symbolic sim-ilarity to visual identification learning tasksand would not be expected to transfer op-timally to the final task situation. On theother hand, high amounts of positive trans-fer may be expected from pictured repre-sentations (such as films, slides, flat pic-tures) of simulus objects where the finaltask performance requires crucial knowledgeof these objects (10). The purpose of visualsof this kind is to practice, in the learningsituation; the response needed in the per-formance Situation. Gropper has calledthese "criterion visuals" because the "useof visual presentations appears to be desir-able in those subject matters in which visual-ly perceived physical objects and events areintegral parts of the criterion situation"(13) . That is, the learner should be able toobserve, describe, interpret, or reconstructthe precise content presented in the instruc-tion.

It would appear, then, that audio-visualinstructional media that closely representthe physical characteristics of this materialbeing taught should be effective in the teach-in of visual discriminations. Those instruc-tional media particularly high in this quali-ty are sound motion picture films, filmstrips,slides, photographic illustrations, and three-20

dimensional objects. Interestingly enough,however, little audio-visual media researchhas looked specifically at this problem. Rath-er, the research has tested the effects ofstimulus materials that have mixed objec-tives; thus, it is not possible to determinethe specific relationships of the instructionalmedia used to accomplish a specific objec-tive. The best we can do at this point is tosay that the theory strongly indicates thatinstructional mc..dia of a representational na-ture would be highly effective in the teach-ing of visual identifications.

3. Learning principles, concepts andrules. This task involves the learning andunderstanding of relationships among thingsor events, the meaning of rules, or the prin-ciples pertaining to the functioning of dif-ferent kinds of operations. In the teachingof art, this objective would be associatedwith learning of principles governing coloror the understanding of the concepts under-lying the various schools of art.

There is little experimental research withprojected materials or television learning onthis particular objective. However, a recentstudy by Gropper (14) used the programmedinstruction mode to study the learning ofscience concepts and principles on the basisof either visual (pictorial) or verbal (print)presentation alone. Gropper found thatwhen a totally visual (pictorial) presenta-tion of the concept to be learned precededa verbal (print) presentation of the sameconcept, the learning was significantly great-er and took significantly less learning timethan when the verbal presentation precededthe visual one. The importance of thisstudy, for our purposes here, are twofold.First, it represents a systematic attempt todevelop a strategy of instructional media

use by manipulating certain variables andcontrolling others to arrive at a generaliz-able conclusion. Second, it presents some veryconvincing evidence in support of the effec-tiveness of visual (pictorial) presentations.

4. Learning procedures. This task in-volves learning to carry out a sequence ofacts or operations in the proper order. Inthe teaching of art, these might be the learn-ing of the procedure for the making of a silkscreen print or the procedure to follow inpreparing art media for use. Because of thefairly simple nature of the order of mostart procedures, this learning objective maynot be as important as the others. Thereis no recognizable audio-visual research re-lating directly to this problem, but it mightbe expected that sound motion pictures, tele-vised instruction, programmed instruction,and demonstrations would be the education-al media most apt to enhance such learning.

5. Performing skilled perceptual-motoracts. This task involves the use of simpleand complex perceptual-motor skills for per-forming a manipulation task. In the teach-ing of art, this might entail the learning ofproper manipulative techniques with art me-dia such as the handling of tools, watercolorwashes, etc.

There is little doubt about the effective-ness of films in teaching perceptual-motorskills, particularly when students are givenopportunities for active participation d r-ing the presentation process (1,15,18). Stud-ies using the repetitive 8mm film-loop forskill training have demonstrated the efficacyof this promising instructional technique(24). For the art teacher who wishes todevelop specific perceptual-motor skills andto give students an exemplary model tofollow, there would appear to be a sound re-

search base for the employment of motionpicture films, particularly if they are usedcreatively (stopping for practice, repeating,etc.) rather than merely as one-way one-time communication media. If the teacherwill use the repetitive 8mm film-loop andbuild in opportunity for student participa-tion, skills learning will probably be greatlyenhanced.

Making proper use of instructionalmedia in teaching

In the previous section and in Table 1some rough guidelines were presented asaide to the proper selection of instructionalmedia under different conditions of learn-ing. It is suggested that the following step-by-step procedure be used in order to makethe most effective application of instruction-al media to art teaching :

1. State the exact behavior to be expectedof the learner. In other words, as a resultof your teaching of a specific lesson or sub-lesson, precisely what will the student beexpected to learn or what skill to perform?This should be stated in very specific be-havioral terms (8,19).

2. Identify the type of learning objectivebeing met by the instruction. Descriptions oftypes as they relate to art education are pre-sented in the preceding section. These typesare also the column listings in Table 1.

8. Write down the particular "instruction-al event" that will occur (such as, "Intro-duce the art materials for silk screen print-ing" or "Demonstrate the procedure for silkscreen printing"). From Table 1 select theappropriate instructional media options(such as "demonstration procedure" or"film of procedure").

4. Determine availability of the instruc-tional media to meet the educational objec-tive (from school materials, audio-visualcatalogs, personal resources, etc.).

5. Arrange for preparation of unavail-able instructional media.

The preceding five steps may appear to beunnecessarily detailed, and the art teacher,of course, will not be able to follow them forevery lesson. They were presented, how-ever, in the belief that if the teacher has aclear conception of his objectives and thebehavior expected from his students, he willbe able to make more intelligent media se-lections. This method substitutes a proce-dure that uses easoned choice based on someset of standards for a procedure that oper-ates merely on the basis of what materialsare available. As a result, the quality ofinstruction should be improved.

Relationship to learner characteristicsSome time ago C. R. Carpenter (8) ex-

pressed the opinion that the effects of filminstruction, within certain limits, dependmore upon the characteristics of the per-ceivers, individuals, and audiences thanupon the elemental variables within thefilms themselves. That such is the case hasnot been studied experimentally, but it isclear that there is some interaction betweenthe characteristics of learners and the in-structional media used. Just what these in-terrelationships are has not been investigatedalthough recent studies are seeking answers.

Grower (14) has just reported that stu-dents of below average IQ receiving instruc-tion in programmed textbooks un science con-cepts learned more easily by means of dis-crimination practice based on visual (pic-torial) stimulus and visual (pictorial) re-22

sponse options than by means of verbal(printed) stimulus and response material.He suggests that below average studentscan respond to visual examples better thanverbal examples because they have hadconsiderable prior experience in respondingto the concrete attributes of physical ob-jects and events; it is a relatively easy taskfor them. Recent interest by art educatorsin a so-called "visual ability" in learnersraises the question of the relationship ofthis special aptitude to learning from visualmaterials. The evidence is inconclusive atthis time although several investigators arestudying the problem. Dawson (5), in astudy of figure/ground graphic configura-tions, found that students with high "figuralability" scores on the Guilford-ZimmermanAptitude Survey recognized significantlymore correct configurations than those withlow "figural ability" scores. Gagne and Grop-per (11), on the other hand, failed to revealany significant relationships between visualaptitudes and a person's capacity to profitfrom visual presentation.

General conclusionsThe overriding conclusion that emerges

from an objective assessment of the tudio-visual instructional media field is this : mo-tion picture films, filmstrips, pictorial illus-trations, programmed instructional tech-niques, etc., are obviously highly useful ininstruction under certain conditions. Allart teachers have had experience with theiruse; and this experience, based on impres-sions or even on the impact such materialsmake on students, has added up to a gener-alized belief that these audio-visual instruc-tional media have value in teaching. Theproblem, however, is that when we look tothe research literature for evidence on the

VI

particular effectiveness of specific kinds ofmedia, we find that such precise verifyingevidence is lacking. To be sure, numerousevaluative studies demonstrate the effective-ness of these materials in general. But wejust do not know the specific conditionsunder which audio-visual media are mosteffective.

It was the intent of this paper to pointup some of these problems, to present a pre-liminary kind of taxonomy that might as-sist the art teacher in determining his in-structional objectives, and to point out someof the areas in which audio-visual instruc-tional media might be useful in art teaching.

REFERENCES

1. Allen, William H. "Audio-Visual Communica-tions." In Chester W. Harris (editor), Encyclopediaof Educational Research. Third Edit!on. New York:MacMillan, 1960, Pp. 115-37.2. Carpenter, C. R. "A Theoretical Orientation for

Instructional Film Research." AV CommunicationsReview. 1:38-52; Winter, 1953.

3. Carpenter, C. R. "Recent Progress at the In-struction Film Research Program." Journal of theUniversity Film Producers Association. 6:13-15;Spring, 1954.4. Carpenter, C. R., and Greenhill, L P. Instruc-

tional Television Research: Report Number Two:An Investigation of Closed Circuit Television forTeaching University Courses. University Park, Pa.:Division of Academic Research and Services. Penn-sylvania State University, Spring, 1958.5. Dawson, Marvin. The Role of Context in Learn-

ing Pictorial Materials. Bloomington, Ind.: Audio-Visual Center, Indiana University, February, 1964.6. Gage, N. L. "Theories of Teaching." In Ernest

R. Hilgard, (Ed.), Theories of Learning and In-struction. Sixty-Third Yearbook of the NationalSociety for the Study of Education, Part I. Chicago:The Society, 1964.7. Gagne, Robert M. The Conditions of Learning.

New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1965.

8. Gagne, Robert M. "The Analysis of Instruc-tional Objectives for the Design of Instruction."In Robert Glaser (Ed.), Teaching Machines andProgramed Learning, II: Data and Directions.Washington: Department of Audiovisual Instruc-tion, National Education Association, 1965. Pp. 21-65.9. Gagne, Robert M., and Bolles, Robert C. "A

Review of Factors in Learning Efficiency." InEugene Gallanter (Ed.), Automatic Teaching: TheState of the Art. New York: Wiley, 1959.10. Gagne, Robert M., and Foster Harriett. "Trans-fer to a Motor Skill From Practice on a PicturedRepresentation." Journal of Experimental Psychol-ogy. 39:342-55; 1949.11. Gagne, Robert M., and Gropper, George L.Studies in Filmed Instruction. 1. Individual Difer-ences in Learning from Visual and Verbal Presen-tations. 2. The Use of Visual Examples in Review.Pittsburgh: American Institutes for Research, 1965.(In preparation).12. Gibson, James 3. "A Theory of Pictorial Per-ception." AV Communication Review. 2:8-23; Win-ter, 1954.13. Gropper, George L. "Why Is a Picture Wortha Thousand Words?" AV Communication Review.11:75-95.; July-August, 1963.14. Gropper, George L. "Learning from Visuals:Some Behavioral Considerations." AV Communica-tion Review. (In press, Spring, 1966.)15. Hoban, Charles F., and van Ormer, Edward B.Instructional Film Research, 1918-1950. TechnicalReport No. SDC 269-7-19, Instructional Film Re-search Program, Pennsylvania State College. PortWashington, L. I., N. Y.,: U.S. Navy Special De-vices Center, 1950.16. Hovland, C. I. "Human Learning and Reten-tion." In S. S. Stevens (Ed.), Handbook of Experi-mental Psychology. New York: Wiley, 1951.17. Kumata, Hideya. "A Decade of Teaching byTelevision." In Wilbur Schramm (Ed.), The Im-pact of Educational Television. Urbana: Universityof Illinois Press, 196018. Lumadaine, A. A. "Instruments and Media ofInstruction." In N. L. Gage (Ed.), Handbook ofResearch on Teaching. Chicago: Rand McNally,1963. Pp. 583-682.19. Mager, Robert F. Preparing Objectives forProgrammed Instruction. San Francisco: FearonPublishers, 1962.20. McLuhan, Marshall. Understanding Media.

23

New York: McGraw-Hill, 1964.21. Osgood, C. E. Method and Theory in Experi-mental Psychology. New York: Oxford UniversityPress, 1958.22. Schramm, Wilbur. The Research on ProgramedInstruction: An Annotated Bibliography. Bulletin1964, No. 85, OE-84084. Washington: Office ofEducation, U.S. Department of Health, Education,and Welfare, 1964.28. Silberman, Harry F. "Self-Teaching Devicesand Programed Materials." Review of EducationalResearch. 82: 179-98; April, 1962.24. Wendt, Paul R., and Butts, Gordon K. "Audio-visual Materials." Review of Educational Research.32:141-55; April, 1962.

TABLE 1. Instructional Media Stimulus Relationships to Learning Objectives.

INSTRUCTIONALMEDIA TYPE:

LEARNING OBJECTIVES:Learning Learning LearningFactual VisualInformation Identill- Concepts

cations and Rules

LearningProcedures

PerformingSkilledPerceptual-Motor Acts

DevelopingDesirableAttitude),Opinions &Motivations

Still Pictures Medium HIGH Medium Medium low low

Motion Pictures Medium HIGH HIGH HIGH Medium Medium

Television Medium Medium HIGH Medium low Medium

8-D Objects low HIGH low low low low

Audio Recordings Medium low low Medium low Medium

ProgrammedInstruction Medium Medium Medium HIGH low Medium

Demonstration low Medium low HIGH Medium Medium

Printed Textbooks Medium low Medium Medium low Medium

Oral Presentation Medium low Medium Medium low Medium

24

TABLE 2. Equipment/Media Relationships and Considerations.11=1!111.,

Instrument1. Filmstrip

or slideprojector

2, Overheadtransparencyprojector

3. Wall chartsor posters

Media Used

85mm filmstripsor 2x2 slides

Still picturesand graphicrepresentationsStill pictures

4. Motion pic-tures (pro-jection togroups)

16mm motionpicture(sound orsilent)

MaterialsProductionConsiderations

Inexpensive.May be done locallyin short time.

Very inexpensive.May be done locallyin short time.

Very inexpensive.May be done locallyin very short time.

Specially-produced.Sound film is costlyand requires 6-12months time.

Availabilityof Facilitiesand EquipmentUsually available.Requires darkenedroom.

Available. Maybe _projected inlight room.

Available. Nospecial equip-ment

Usually avail-able. Requiresdarkenedclassroom.

Equipment Cost

low

low

verylow

moderate

5. Motion pic-ture pro-jection asrepetitiveloops (8mmsilent) toindividuals

6. Magnetictape re-corder

8mm motion

silentpicture()film Special productionnormally necessary.May be produced as

16mm film alone orlocally at low costand in short time.

Not normally avail-able. Will need tobe specially pro-cured to meet re-quirement of instruc-tional program.

low perunit, butmoderate forgroups

14" magnetictape

Easy and inexpensive.Usually producedlocally.

Available low

7. Recordplayer

33%, 45or 78 rpmdisk recordings

Need special recording Usuallyfacilities. Usually availablecommercially made.

low

8. Displayarea

3 -D models May vary in complexity Availableand in difficulty ofproduction. Componentparts easy to obtain.

9. Television-(closed

circuit)

Live presen-tations. Motionpicture film.Videotaperecordin,gs.Still pictures.

Normally requireslarge and skilledproduction staff.

Not normallyavailable

variesfrom lowto high

moderateto high

10. Teaching Programmedmachines & materialprogramedtextbooks

m

Some programs avail-able commercially.But will normally bespecially preparedfor course.

Not normallyavailable

low per unit,but moderatefor groups

11. Systemcombina-tions

Television.Motion pic-tures. Stillpictures. Audio

rdings.

Complex. Probably will Not normallybe done locally to availablemeet specific re-quirements.

moderateto high

25

INSTRUCTIONAL MEDIA AND ART EDUCATION : A PR OSPECTUSOF OPPORTUNITIES AND RECIPROCAL CONCERNSKenneth Norberg, Sacramento State College

Many educators, teachers, and laymen havedoubts and misgivings about the growinguse of machines and "gadgets" in theschools, particularly those that entail thecapability of recording and/or amplifyingthe distribution of instructional presenta-tions (as in the case of television), andthose that "automate" instructional func-tions (as in the case of programmed instruc-tion, electronic classrooms, and the like).Among the most explicit critics of tech-nological developments have been such re-presentatives of the literary community asJoseph Wood Krutch, and certain staunchdefenders of the more traditional academicpractices who fear that new media may"water down" content, or interfere with thedevelopment of reading skills. Anothercommon concern is the fear that machinesmay "dehumanize" education. Less fre-quently expressed, but no doubt present isalso the uneasiness on the part of teacherswho sense that the changing patterns of in-struction may constitute a very real threatto the privacy of their classrooms, a d totheir autonomy as individual teachers.

Several years ago, 'Tames Finn suggesteda connection between the critics of recenttechnology in education and the liter-ary intellectuals" who constitute the anti-scientific anti-technological culture of C. P.Snow's analysis : "The Two Cultures andthe Scientific Revolution" (11). If there isindeed a fundamental cleft between the lit-erary-humane and scientific-technologicalsegments of modern culture, and if thisseparation permeates education, how doesthis involve art education and its use ofnewer media of communication? Is thetechnical aspect of change in contemporaryeducation considered destructive or inimicalto the arts? There are some who feel this26

is so, and possibly not only those who teachthe humanities but all men of this age areto some extent ambivalent on this question.Bruno Bettelheim has pointed out that mod-ern man, when haunted, is not haunted byother men, but by machines (4). Add tothis 20th century psychological syndromeLanier's observation that art education doesnot present a tidy, systematic and well-de-fined body of subject-matter, that it is con-cerned not only with cognitive but alsowith attitudinal and qualitive ends'addthese facts, and the application of instruc-tional technology, with its emphasis uponquantitative distribution of information, ex-act specification of instructional objectives,and precise measurement of outcomes, pre-sents at least some questionable aspects.

If a part of contemporary man is hesi-tant, defensive, and skeptical toward thecontinued advance of technology, there isanother part that faces the hard fact thatit is there, inextricably woven into our lives,that there is no way to deal with the pres-ent nor to face the future, without it. Inits largest aspect, the problem is simply tocarry through and extend the benefits of thescientific revolution to the underdevelopedareas of the globe. As Snow puts it, "Thereis no excuse for Western man not to knowthis. And not to know this is the one wayout through the three menaces that standin our wayH-bomb war, overpopulation,the gap between the rich and the poor. Thisis one of the situations where the worstcrime is innocence" (34, p. 48). Not every-one agrees with Snow, but no one shouldignore his argument. What he is saying ineffect is that we can't harm a world thatcontinues split in two parts : one enjoy-ing the benefits of modern science, theother held in a state of deprivation and en-

slavement to the brute demands of physi-cal survival because it is still living in thepast. If this is a viable argument for worldcivilization as a whole, why does it not alsoapply internally to the various institutionsor other elements of a particular culture?Of all activities in our society, educationshould demonstrate the most advanced useof science and technology in the discharge ofits own functions. We can't turn back thetechnological clock as the Erewhonians didin Samuel Butler's novel. But we canstrive to "humanize the machine," as LewisMumford insists we must if man is to sur-vive. And if this goal is truly important,what better place to demonstrate how itmight be realized than in education? It isbecoming increasingly apparent that edu-cation is still trailing far behind the tech-nological potential of our time (7). Whatis perhaps less obvious is that education of-fers a proving ground where, if anywhere,man can test his ability to enhance humanliving through technology without lettingthe development of the means become anend (and thereby, a dehumanizing force)in its own right.

Could a relationship of mutual under-standing and reciprocal "trading off" ofvalues benefit both art education and theuse of modern technology in education?With such an end in view, what might artand the artist-teacher do to improve educa-tional media and promote their wider andbetter use? This will be the subject of alater section of this paper, but first we needto view the problem in its cultural context.Art and technology

What does the artist or the artist-educa-tor see when he looks toward technologyin society and in education? Beck (3)

has noted a broad spectrum of points ofview which divides, roughly, into two bands.On the one hand are the artists, philoso-phers, critics, and others who believe that welive in a "waist-high" (15) culture in whicha combination of political, economic, andtechnological factors tend to proliferate anddiffuse art, and to degrade it at the sametime (3, p.3ff). We live in a "kitsch;" cul-ture of slick commercial art, television com-mercials and comic books. One observermakes the comment that technology inevitablymakes a commodity of art and thus cheapensit (5). Another finds that "there is a blend-ing of technics, commerce, and art thatblurs distinctions between good and badart" (20, p. 15). Machine production offersexciting opportunities to the designer, butin the final analysis he is thwarted because"he is relatively insignificant in the over-all picture" and "he is not able to havethat final and necessarily unequivocal wordin his own area" (20, p. 22). Moreover,"even when good design is a deliberatelyplanned feature of a mass-produced arti-el the countless repetitions of its shape de-te the aesthetic purpose" (20, p. 23).Beauty palls when it is seen in "endless re-iteration." Thus, it would appear that thereis a kind of unavoidable, built-in, conflictbetween technology and art, truly and "in-evitable" war between creative art and thetaste of a mass culture. The view is funda-mentally pessimistic because the conflictand the "war" are considered to be un-avoidable and irremediable. Because theseare the hard "facts," the modern artist isforced to guard his integrity by sonic sortof voluntary separation from society andthe body politic (20, p. 26ff.). This estrange»ment, this "lingering spiritual isolation" ofthe artist has educational implications

27

which will be discussed later.Although pessimism is the predominant

attitude among artists and critics, Beck re-minds us that there is also a substantialbody of opinion which leans toward the po-sition that possibly the conflict of art andmass culture may not be so unresolvableafter all (8). Some believe standards oftaste can be improved. Mass communica-tion has enlarged the audience of fine art.Not only is the modern artist challenged togive creative expression to the technologi-cal character of his time; there are thosewho would perhaps agree with the commentthat, "The beginning of wisdom seems tolie in the perceptive resolution to accept, tounderstand, and to make use of the tech-nology of the machine for the enjoymentsof art creation and appreciation" (3, pp.5-6). The full implicationsthe logical con-clusionof such a rapprochement were per-haps best expressed by the Bauhaus groupwho insisted that the distinctions betweenthe fine and the applied arts were artificial,that technology and aesthetics could andshould be joined in a society where the func-tipnal application of art and design wouldenhance the quality of living for all.

Obviously, the two broad positions justoutlined have important implications for ed-ucation, and for the more specific question :what do artists and art educators see whenthey look toward the newer educational me-dia? Both the pessimistic and the optimisticpoints of view are represented in Kaufman'srecent and penetrating analysis, "Art and Ed-ucation in Contemporary Culture," ex-cerpts of which appear in the 1965 "Reportof the Comission on Art Education" (20).Art education has a responsibility "to as-sess the inherently evocative aspects and thecomparative worth of the environment," in28

a larger sense, to attempt to bring an en-vironment of greater worth and beauty intobeing (20, p. 26). Educators, says Kauf-man, should be mindful of Lewis Mumford'sinsight into the dichotomy of "those thingsof meaning with no use, and things of usewith no other meaning" (20, p. 26). But,at the same time, the art educator must re-member that, "Socially, as well as spiritually,the common American metier is indifferentor hostile to art" (20, p. 25). We live in apredominately visual culture, because tech-nology and the resulting complexities ofmodern living require a more of communica-tion which can efficiently "integrate maninto the gears and energies of the machine"(20, p. 16). But the visual opportunitiesand requirements of technology should notbe confused with the concerns of fine art,per se. The two visual approaches appearto be essentially irreconcilable. Any attemptto combine them, though laudable in a demo-cratic setting, "simply neglects too manyfacets of art" (20, p. 33). To lump fine arttogether with commercial and industrial arttends to blur qualitative distinctions, to ne-glect the "fundamental and uncorruptedqualities of art" i20, p. 33) .

Kaufman's charge to art education isclear. It is also ambivalent, and the am-bivalence is there because it is in the cul-ture. Art education has the responsibility totry to produce a culture of greater integrityand worth, but it also has a prior responsi-bility to "look to the vital core of art, to theongoing yet changing traditions of crea-tive search" which are most often found in"fine art" (20, p. 34). To the extent thatcultural enhancement seems to imply widerparticipation hi functions not directly re-lated to fine art, the artist and the art edu-cator appear to be caught in a bind. Torn

between two conflicting claims, the priorone requires the artist-educator to behavein such a way as to perpetuate the bind, notto relieve it. Does this mean that the volun-tary withdrawal of the artisthis aliena-tion from a culture that can only prostitutehis workextends to the artist-educatortoo? At any rate, this is the ambivalencethe dilemmaso vividly exposed in ICauf-man's analysis.

Education in the new age of the visible

Never before has the world been made sovisable. Man has always been a great "look-er" but never has he spent so much time justlooking as he does now. Instead of a sketchpad, modern man has his camera ; instead ofa book he has his television set. This isprobably not quite accurate, because manywho have television wouldn't have beenreaders in the past. But there is enoughtruth, here, to prompt the observation thatwe live in a period of "retreat from theword" (85). Despite the fact that morebooks are printed and sold than ever before,there seems to a growing number of observerswho note, and frequently regret, that welive in what McLuhan has called a "post-lingual" age (28). Is it really that? In thiswriter's opinion, McLuhan's statement isprovocative but typically extravagant. Theword is far from dead, despite Steiner (85),McLuhan (28), and others who write somany words explaining why words no long-er really matter. What is more to the issueis that we are living in a "new age of thevisible" (87). The point is not that wordsno longer matter, but that the visual imagedoes. The whole world of nature, th