teacher as researcher || action research and preservice teachers

National Art Education Association

Action Research and Preservice TeachersAuthor(s): Karen Lee CarrollSource: Art Education, Vol. 50, No. 5, Teacher as Researcher (Sep., 1997), pp. 6-13Published by: National Art Education AssociationStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3193657 .

Accessed: 14/06/2014 11:47

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

National Art Education Association is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to ArtEducation.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 91.229.229.212 on Sat, 14 Jun 2014 11:47:36 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=naea

http://www.jstor.org/stable/3193657?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


SPECIAL

Figure 1. Art Education students

prepare a number of tasks for

prekindergarten and kindergarten children to learn more about the

early development of drawing.

i.g,;Ait0"0 i; t tLSt ft: ..... . :::. ,!: __.

ART EDUCATION / SEPTEMBER 1997



BY KAREN LEE CARROLL

_

_

_

r _ __

__

- s_

* ^w *2

| - |

- ' }E o - hers /l Z J n~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

roblem: How can preservice teachers be provided an experiential introduction to artistic growth and develop-

ment? How can future teachers develop a sense of what is developmentally appropriate at the different grade levels? How can they sharpen their think- ing about drawing behaviors, the way children start to draw, and the subse- quent need for cultivation? How can they come to understand the need for, and the potential of, different drawing strategies? How can they be motivated to read the literature of research and practice? And how can they begin to form long-lasting attitudes that will cause them to think about teaching as "research in the classroom"?

Solution: Create a course that engages preservice teachers in action research focused on drawing with learners from early childhood to ado- lescence.

Such a course, entitled 'The Arts and Human Development," has been developed for preservice art education majors at the Maryland Institute, College of Art in Baltimore. Now in its fifth year, the course offers future art teachers the opportunity to engage in drawing research with the total popu- lation of a public elementary and mid- dle school located within our urban

campus neighborhood. This article reports on the model used to structure the research project, some of the results of the research, and offers some thoughts on the relevanc of such an approach for general education majors as well as future art specialists.

The assumption which grounds both the course and the project is that drawing behaviors provide a window into artistic growth and development. Preservice students can learn about the nature of symbolic language, the human propensity to represent ideas and feelings visually, and the manner in which graphic and artistic behaviors can be cultivated. With each year of implementation, the design of the course and the research project have evolved. The major components now include: (1) a close reading of literature from research and practice relat- ed to drawing development and pedagogy; (2) the use of personal reflective journals; (3) the formation of teams that generate research questions, then design and carry out research activities; (4) three separate rounds of research, the first round with pre-kindergarten, kindergarten, grade one and two students; the second round with grades three, four, and five; and the last round with sixth,

seventh, and eighth graders; (5) a process for analyzing, reporting, and sharing findings; and (6) a visit to high schools where observations complete the K-12 picture of artistic growth and development.

READINGS IN THE LITERATURE Golomb's (1992) The Child's

Creation of a Pictorial World serves as the primary text. Illustrating how a psychologist of art explores the nature and meaning of drawing behaviors, Golomb provides numerous models for research questions and activities. Research reports from studies conducted by art educators who have focused on drawing development, as well as books and articles that offer specific pedagogical approaches, also play an important part in the course.

REFLECTIVE JOURNALS Students keep a reflective journal

and are provided a list of guiding questions to use over the course of the semester. They begin by describing themselves as researchers, recount- ing their own drawing history. Some have been reunited with their childhood art work and include it in their journals. Notes from class discussions and readings are added along the way. For each round of research activities,

SEPTEMBER 1997 / ART EDUCATION



Figure 2 (LEFT), 3 (BELOW) & 4

(RIGHT). Three responses by third

graders show different solutions to rep-

resenting the game "Hide and Seek." In

Figure 2, the device of transparency is

used to show a girl hiding from her sis-

ters in her closet. Figure 3 shows

occlusion or overlap as people peep out

from behind the trees. Figure 4 shows

an entire building in which someone is

hiding.

students identify research questions and methods developed by their group prior to the visit, record field-notes immediately following the research activities, and conclude with reflections on the research process and findings.

THE RESEARCH PROJECT Dates for the research activities are

negotiated with the school. The vice principals for the elementary and mid- dle school help make logistical arrange- ments. The research is conducted in regular classrooms under the supervi- sion of the teacher. Each round of research entails preparation for a single classroom visit, usually 45-60 minutes in length. The college students design and rehearse their activities in their class at the college. Organized first into teams of eight or nine, individual stu-

dents prepare to work with one or two pre-kindergarten students for 25 minutes (See Fig. 1), then move to the kindergarten where they may have a table of four or five children for another 25 minutes. This ratio allows for close observation and conversation. Smaller teams of two to four or five work with the other grade levels, tak- ing on various roles in the process of implementing their activities.

ANALYZING DATA, REPORTING, AND SHARING THE RESULTS

Immediately following the research activity with the children, teams assemble to study the drawings. A list of guiding questions drawn from the literature helps each research team think about the results as well as the requirements for the oral report to the college class. Teams divide up the reporting tasks, which


C'

0 1

f%l 5

jS, 9t' Alt^, t



include the creation of a visual display. This display must be instructional, have sufficient text to explain the research question and findings, and provide a sample of work generated by students. A week later the teams make their reports to the class. These group reports are videotaped and fol- lowed by class discussions. The writ- ten reports are then reviewed by the instructor. The class meeting following the reports is devoted to further review of the literature and preparation for drawing with the next grade levels, thus setting up a cycle of preparation, research, and debriefing.

By the conclusion of three rounds of research, the class will have worked with every grade from pre- kindergarten to eight. Every student researcher will have participated in three different studies. In order to compile a class document, responsibility for creating abstracts is divided

among the class members. Each student takes responsibility for sum- marizing one study and selecting images to accompany the abstract. The final step involves putting the abstract and the images onto computer. Copies of this research summary are distributed to all class members as well as the entire administration and teaching staff at the participating school.

At the end of the semester, student researchers make a return visit to the classrooms where they conducted their studies to share their findings with students and teachers. Children at the school who have exhibited unusual drawing ability are nominated for scholarships in the college's Young People's Studio Program.

BEGINNING QUESTIONS: UNDERSTANDING THE NATURE OF DRAWING

Preservice teachers usually begin replicating research studies from the literature with pre-kindergarten and kindergarten children. For some students, this is their first opportunity to really observe the ways children draw and to listen to children talk about their drawings. Usually they begin by invit- ing children to make a free drawing, then proceed to direct a series of drawing tasks, labeling the work and record- ing children's commentary. One task taken from Golomb (1992) compares the schema a student uses in response to the request to "Draw me a person" with a drawing of a person resulting from a dictated list of body parts. Such a task reveals both the economy of the original schema and the capacity to add




more visual information upon request. Another task is designed to reveal how children may adapt their schema for a person to represent their family and animals. Another one involves figure completion and is useful in revealing how children think and problem solve as they draw.

This close observation and conversation with young children seems to help preservice teachers in a number of ways. Some are relieved to know they can talk and work with young children. Many become fascinated with the way in which each child seems to go about solving the problems of graphic repre- sentation. Most are amazed to find that their results are consistent with the findings of published researchers. In some ways, this seems to give the literature of research more credibility and students then seem more willing to place some confidence in it.

TESTING INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES: NURTURING DRAWING BEHAVIORS

As the research subjects become older, it becomes apparent that drawing issues are less about nature and more about nurture. Comparing pre- and post-instruction drawings provides students with a way of seeing the impact of particular drawing or instructional strategies. A pre-instruction drawing from memory usually reveals the level at which a drawer feels most comfortable. Different strategies, such as pre-visualization dialogues or the use of exemplars or activities, can then be assessed in relationship to a drawing of record. For example, following a strategy drawn from Golomb's research, children were invited to talk about and play the game of "Hide and Seek." The resulting drawings suggest ways children will push beyond the principles that ordinarily guide their

drawings, using occlusion and other conventions (See Fig. 2, 3, & 4). In another study, fourth graders were first asked to depict favorite activities show- ing motion. Post-instruction drawings following stretching and bending activities combined with drawing demonstrations on the board revealed significant changes in students' ability to graphically represent motion.

The comparison of different drawing strategies also provides a model for research activities. Drawings from memory can be compared to drawings from observation and imagination. Some of our students tested strategies from the literature. "What happened next?," a strategy found in both Wilson, Hurwitz, and Wilson (1987) and Olson (1992) allowed our students to see how children might use art exemplars (See Figs. 5 & 6). One group combined writing and drawing (as recommended in

Olson), looking for the relationship between the two.

As these college students progress through three rounds of research, they begin to see more clearly the relationship between nature and nurture. While children initially demonstrate natural inclinations for drawing, these student-researchers discovered loss of confidence in drawing as early as the second grade. They became aware of the principles that seem to guide the early drawing efforts of children (Wilson & Wilson, 1982) and begin to see the responsibility the teacher has for finding ways to help students improve their representational skills. By testing ways in which certain themes, pre-visualization dialogues, stories, activities, demonstrations, visual formulas, and practice with drawing affect representational efforts, they develop a repertoire of ideas and strate-




gies for teaching. As they move through the text, they also encounter additional questions: What makes certain children gifted or able drawers? What is the relationship between men- tal age and drawing? How do children think critically about their own drawings?

CHANGING THE BEHAVIORS OF NOVICE ART SPECIALISTS

While it is clear that the experience of engaging with action research at this level of professional development has immediate and positive effects on preservice students, the influence of this research project can also be seen later in student teaching and the first few years of employment. For example, student teachers are now more likely to include a diagnostic step in the initial lesson of an instructional unit and use that information in developing an

:! X: : Figure 5 and 6. Two fifth

graders use different elements

from "St. George and the

.; / ^. ... Dragon" to show their idea of

I . ..\. what happened next. While the

/ !/ \ \ depiction of the horse and rider

t^ >-V \ \ in both drawings seems

T (/ ( I -f informed by the figures in the

~^ t / i :: painting, the narratives are

> /4 : / quite different. The dragon in /~{ (i \ i Fig. 5 dwarfs St. George in a

^~ \ n~ ~ scene using many landscape elements from the painting. In

Fig. 6, the focus is on St.

George and the dragon at a dramatic point in the contest.

instructional plan. They also appear to be attending more carefully to the problems drawing poses for their students, building in sessions that coach children on techniques for drawing figures, animals, and other subject matter essential to the ideas they wish to express. They exercise the habit of critically examin- ing work resulting from a given class as a reflective step because they understand how it helps them plan the next class meeting where they might need to reteach a concept, include additional instruction, or reinforce certain techniques, skills, or concepts. Finally, student teachers are beginning to talk about themselves as researchers in the classroom, some even working on their first article for publication within the first few years of teaching (Roupp, 1996).

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRESERVICE ART EDUCATION

Working closely with preservice teachers as they interact with and observe children drawing, helping them form their own research questions, and guiding their search for strategies to test in the classroom sheds light on how preservice teachers learn. We often assume that teacher candidates will understand a great deal from simply reading the literature and by collecting children's drawings. Testing that literature with real children brings it alive, makes it relevant, and gives it credibility. The process also seems to help preservice teachers conquer their early fears of teaching by getting them into the classroom where they can teach in teams using activities that are essentially one-time, simple encounters. Many find this experience has affirmed their interest in teaching and given them confidence in their ability to do it successfully.

It appears that contemporary technology has a contribution to make to such a project. The nature of the final report has evolved over four years. Last year, with the help of a faculty member in the computer department and with student access to computer labs, these researchers were able to use a pre-for- matted layout in QuarkExpress to enter their text. They also learned how to scan their images with PhotoShop and moved them into the layout. For many, it was their first attempt at using the computer to merge image and text. As the instructor, I acted as the editor for the document, making the final check of layout and copy. The resulting document is loaded with both perceptions about the nature of drawing and ideas for teaching. It is only one step from yet another level of dialogue that might be conducted with other preservice teachers entertaining the same kind of

SEPTEMBER 1997 / ART EDUCATION N



research studies. Such a dialogue could certainly be accommodated via the Internet, linking the research efforts of preservice teachers from many different institutions or preservice teachers with master teachers in the field.

IMPLICATIONS FOR GENERAL EDUCATION ART METHODS COURSES

It seems that this kind of an action research project has merit for the preparation of art specialists. It may also have value, even in a modified form, for general education preservice teachers. The classroom teachers we work with in the local school are quite interested in our findings and eager to tell us about their students who draw frequently and well. Yet they would benefit from a clearer understanding of how graphic language develops or how to facilitate and nurture that process in simple, everyday ways. If general education majors were invited to look closely at drawing behaviors, they might develop a better understanding of artistic growth and development, as well as greater insight into the role they might play in nurturing graphic repre- sentation. They might understand the thought processes involved in solving drawing problems and discover many useful instructional strategies. Such issues and strategies should be at the center of art methods courses for art specialists and general education majors yet often they are not. An art methods course for general education majors with an action research project as its center might make a difference in how they think about their own drawing history and the representational needs and possibilities of their future students.

CONCLUSIONS Given the research agenda initiated

Figure 7. Third grader

responding to one of her Ye *fid teQ SlU mit ttsoin HK.

classmate's drawings from sa,g iti,r g,dAlaXts to dw

the "Hide and Seek" study. th"teltenov pihiWsdid spek. The,e re,, t.,esultsf .of

The display illustrates the p

out quV.tiOn: W4ow idn hildtth research question, strate- o vAthe d iwing Ptlrn O

gies, and results. otpVih.W

by the NAEA (1996), model projects such as this suggest ways to engage a new generation of teachers with research. Such projects give preservice teachers reasons to read research literature carefully as they search for questions to ask and tasks to test. It sends them to the literature of practice for teaching strategies that offer to solve drawing problems. Reflective attitudes are shaped by testing strategies, attending to the course of implementation, and assessing the results. Both the crit- ical eye and ear are sharpened as researchers learn to look at and listen to what learners do and say about their representational efforts.

Golomb's (1992) text on drawing research concludes with the observation that, in spite of the natural propensity all children seem to have for drawing, most eventually stop drawing. If art educators are serious about keep- ing graphic language alive and grow-

ing, we must attend to it ourselves and give support to our colleagues in general education. By providing action-based research projects, which bring both general classroom and art specialist preservice teachers into close contact with learners and their drawing behaviors, a respect for the drawing act can be generated. Further, future teachers will discover that learning to draw poses representational problems for learners which they can address by making use of the rich repertoire of teaching strategies currently available in art education pedagogy. It can help them understand their responsibility for nurturing graphic and artistic modes of thought and expression and familiarize them with the developmen- tal needs and abilities of learners. Finally, it may interest them in the habits of mind associated with good research and motivate them to make

- ART EDUCATION / SEPTEMBER 1997



their own contribution to research in art education.

Karen Lee Carroll is the Graduate . . . . . .. DirectorforArt Education at the Maryland Institute, College ofArt in Baltimore.

REFERENCES Golomb, C. (1992). 7he child's creation of a

pictorial world. Berkeley: University of California Press.

NAEA Commission on Research in Art Education (E. Zimmerman, Chair).: (1996). Art education: Creating a visual arts research agenda toward the 21st centu- ry. Reston, VA: National Art Education Association.

Olson, J. (1992). Envisioning writing: Toward an integration of drawing and writing. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Ruopp, A (1996, April). Narrative drawing: A study in personal histories. School Arts, 20- 21.

Wilson, B., & Wilson, M. (1982). Teaching children to draw: A guidefor teachers and parents. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice- Hall.

Wilson, B., Hurwitz, A, & Wilson, M. (1987). 0l Teaching drawingfrom art. Worcester, MA: Davis Press.

AUTHOR NOTE: The author would like to recognize the

assistance of Henry Jones, Professor of Art Education at the Maryland Institute in helping shape the research project and thank Mr. Whorley, Principal; Ms. Thompson and Ms. Harahan, Assistant Principals, and all the teachers and students at the Mt. Royal Public * School in the City of Baltimore for their coop- eration and participation.

The author welcomes inquiries from college instructors interested in initiating such a course and setting up an exchange of research studies with our students. Order now and receive a free 24-page executive summary of The Quiet Interested parties may fax (410) 225-2257, e- Evolution. To order this book, please complete the coupon below and mail: [email protected] or write to: return it with your check for $25 plus $3 for postage and handling to Getty Department of Art Education, The Maryland Trust Publications Distribution Center, P.O. Box 49659, Los Angeles, CA, Institute, College of Art, 1300 Mt. Royal Ave., ~ 90049-0659. Make your check payable to Getty Trust Publications (CA residents Baltimore, MD 21217. add 8.25% sales tax). Or call (800) 223-3431 between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. (PST) and

*Photo credits: Karen Carroll refer to code ECB. Please allow four to six weeks for delivery.

Name

Institution

Address THEGETTY

City State Zip Code EDUCATION INSTITUTE FOR

Daytime Telephone Number THE ARTS




teacher as researcher || action research and preservice teachers

Documents