 |
Investing
in the power of teachers
to improve teaching and learning. |
     |
|
  |
Access to Art Through Viewer Response June
1999
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Note: This research is part of a thesis submitted to the Faculty of Graduate Studies and Research in partial fulfillment of the requirement for the degree of Master of Education in Curriculum Studies, University of Saskatchewan. The thesis version of the study (which is 211 pages) includes a Literature Review and more extensive Discussion of the Findings. It is available from the University of Saskatchewan Learning Library. Executive SummaryThis qualitative study explores the question of how a generalist elementary teacher can facilitate student access to visual art through the implementation of an instructional model for viewing and responding to works of art. The seven-step viewing process model from the Saskatchewan Arts Education curriculum was selected for implementation in a grade four classroom. One grade four teacher, four of her students, and the researcher participated in the study. Action research methods were used over a ten week period to collect data from interviews, lesson observations and response journals. Response to art comes from a transaction between the viewer and the work. The curriculum model was used by the teacher to guide this transaction in the classroom. Analysis of the oral and written responses of the four students revealed that viewing was a creative, recursive process of inquiry that supported the development of knowledge, skills, attitudes and abilities necessary for access to art. It was found that response activities that promote interpretation and understanding of art develop cumulative knowledge, take a constructivist approach, feature a wide range of art works, and include adequate time for response in a variety of modes. Analysis of data from the teacher's experiences implementing the viewing process in her classroom revealed that a combination of attitude, training and experience contributed to her ability to help students access art. Professional development opportunities, including consultant services, supported successful implementation of the instructional model. Included are recommendations for further research, as well as specific action recommendations for teachers, administrators and consultants to foster art programs that facilitate access to art. AcknowledgementsI wish to thank my thesis advisor Dr.Trevor Gambell for his invaluable guidance and encouragement. I also wish to thank Dr. Peter Purdue and Dr. Alan Ryan for their insight, advice and support for my work. I would like to express my gratitude and appreciation to Cheryle, whose courage and cooperation made this study possible. I am grateful to the Director, Board of Education and colleagues at Northern Lights School Division #113 for their interest and assistance in this project. Financial assistance from the McDowell Foundation is gratefully acknowledged. Thanks are extended to my family and friends for their patience and encouragement, and a special thank you to Marcus for his unwavering support.
Note: This research is part of a thesis submitted to the Faculty of Graduate Studies and Research in partial fulfillment of the requirement for the degree of Master of Education in Curriculum Studies, University of Saskatchewan. The thesis version of the study (which is 211 pages) includes a Literature Review and more extensive Discussion of the Findings. It is available from the University of Saskatchewan Learning Library. Executive SummaryThis qualitative study explores the question of how a generalist elementary teacher can facilitate student access to visual art through the implementation of an instructional model for viewing and responding to works of art. The seven-step viewing process model from the Saskatchewan Arts Education curriculum was selected for implementation in a grade four classroom. One grade four teacher, four of her students, and the researcher participated in the study. Action research methods were used over a ten week period to collect data from interviews, lesson observations and response journals. Response to art comes from a transaction between the viewer and the work. The curriculum model was used by the teacher to guide this transaction in the classroom. Analysis of the oral and written responses of the four students revealed that viewing was a creative, recursive process of inquiry that supported the development of knowledge, skills, attitudes and abilities necessary for access to art. It was found that response activities that promote interpretation and understanding of art develop cumulative knowledge, take a constructivist approach, feature a wide range of art works, and include adequate time for response in a variety of modes. Analysis of data from the teacher's experiences implementing the viewing process in her classroom revealed that a combination of attitude, training and experience contributed to her ability to help students access art. Professional development opportunities, including consultant services, supported successful implementation of the instructional model. Included are recommendations for further research, as well as specific action recommendations for teachers, administrators and consultants to foster art programs that facilitate access to art.
AcknowledgementsI wish to thank my thesis advisor Dr.Trevor Gambell for his invaluable guidance and encouragement. I also wish to thank Dr. Peter Purdue and Dr. Alan Ryan for their insight, advice and support for my work. I would like to express my gratitude and appreciation to Cheryle, whose courage and cooperation made this study possible. I am grateful to the Director, Board of Education and colleagues at Northern Lights School Division #113 for their interest and assistance in this project. Financial assistance from the McDowell Foundation is gratefully acknowledged. Thanks are extended to my family and friends for their patience and encouragement, and a special thank you to Marcus for his unwavering support.
INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDYVisual art is a universal mode of human expression and communication. Art fulfils a multitude of cultural, social, political and personal functions around the world. Our students need access to this rich source of knowledge about the world and about ourselves. Viewing art is participating in art by engaging in a creative process of thoughtful looking at, careful examination of, and response to, an art object. Through the viewing process the viewer gains “access” to the work and arrives at a personal interpretation of it. Interpreting art is making meaning through the viewing experience. Research Focus This study addresses a question that is fundamental to art education pedagogy: “How can we help students to access art?” This question encompasses inquiry into the roles of art educators and students. This basic question was explored through two specific research questions:
The purpose of this study is to enhance visual art education pedagogy through an examination of the implementation of a model of instruction to find out if it supports and improves students' access to art. A model of instruction that applies response theory to art education was selected from the Saskatchewan art education curriculum (see Appendix A). The study includes a description of the experiences of one generalist elementary teacher as she goes through the process of implementing the selected model in an upper elementary classroom, with the support of an arts education consultant. The journey taken by four students to gain meaning from their encounters with visual art is examined through their written and oral responses. The objectives of the research are: 1) to find out if this model facilitates the development of the knowledge, skills and abilities needed by students to view, respond to, and make meaning from and thereby increase their access to art, through an examination of written and oral response during the implementation of the selected model of instruction; 2) to find out if this model “works” from a teacher's point of view -- if it is feasible to expect teachers with limited formal training in visual art education to teach it -- and identify practical issues that should be considered. Background and Rationale My experience teaching children in the Caribbean and in Northern Saskatchewan caused me to reconsider my art program: my attitude and beliefs in the “what,” “why” and “how” of art education gradually changed. I searched for exemplars of art that my students could access, make connections with, and draw meaning from. The old canon of European “masters” I was familiar with was a diet that was too exclusive and unbalanced for my students. They needed to be able to connect to art via their own familiar social and cultural context. Access to art is problematic. There are two facets to the problem to consider: how to bring art closer to where students may be “at” by selecting art that is relevant to their lives, and how to bring students closer to art by giving them the “tools” -- the skills and confidence -- necessary to make meaning from it. This study addresses the problem of how educators can help students gain access to works of art through participation in the creative process of active viewing, engagement in artistic dialogue and construction of meaning from the experience. One of the underlying assumptions of this study is that students are capable of entering the realm of the art critic and that they can learn the skills to engage in the dialogue about art. Elitist and exclusionary attitudes towards what art, and whose art, is worthy of study, make art less accessible to certain groups of people. Choice of artwork for this project was an important part of the research process. The “Viewing Art Works” instructional model for the response process is included in the Saskatchewan Arts Education curriculum guide for all four strands -- dance, drama, music and visual art (1991a,1994a). This model is basic to the critical/responsive component of the curriculum. Selection of the response process in the visual art strand was based on a practical reason: the fact that teachers are expected to implement provincial core curriculum. Teachers in Saskatchewan are implementing the relatively new Arts Education curriculum along with curricula for many other areas of study. This study attempts to find out about curriculum in action in the classroom from the main agent of change: the teacher. At the elementary level in our school division new core curricula for five areas of study have been introduced over the past seven years. Teachers and students are at the receiving end at this point in the curriculum development process and need on-going support for implementation to succeed. Educational consultants are one source of such support. Data collected from this study partly came from the interaction between myself, an arts education consultant with twenty years of experience teaching visual art, and a younger, generalist, elementary teacher who is in the process of implementing the Arts Education curriculum in her classroom. Qualitative research into the life of a teacher and her students as they learn to use an instructional model from the Arts Education curriculum helps us to understand how a teacher negotiates change. This study was a collaborative research project where the teacher started from her own base in her classroom, and worked with me to develop an understanding of viewer-response. The teacher-researcher and I collaboratively undertook the inquiry into the use of the selected instructional model. We formulated plans, tried them out in practice, and assessed and evaluated them. The teacher had the opportunity to develop her skills as a reflective practitioner. The research findings yield information on the issues and concerns that should be considered and addressed to ensure successful implementation of the critical/ responsive component of the Arts Education curriculum. From my own experience as an art educator and consultant who has had many opportunities to talk with teachers and observe lessons, it is my perception that teachers rarely allow for viewer response in the classroom. One of the issues this study sheds light on is the effect and influence of an art specialist in the role of a consultant. The identification of challenges that arose during implementation, and possible solutions developed during the course of the study, will be useful to curriculum developers, consultants, teachers and administrators. This study will focus on the responses of 9-12 year old grade four students. Response activities such as journal writing and discussion foster the development of expressive, perceptual, interpretive and judgmental skills which are applicable far beyond the art classroom. Two different sources of data (written and oral), are used in this study to accommodate the various verbal fluency levels of the students as well as to contribute to research validity. Some students are more comfortable expressing themselves orally than in writing, or vice versa. A delimitation of this study is the use of language to explain understandings derived from “reading” visual images. Elliot Eisner reminds us of the challenges inherent in art criticism: In using language to make public qualities and meanings that are not themselves discursive, something of a paradox exists. How can words express what words can never express? The successful resolution of this paradox lies at the heart of the critical act. . . to expect to translate what is known in a visual mode into a discursive mode is to use the term translate metaphorically (Eisner, 1979, p. 197). Talking or writing about art -- which is what the student-participants have done -- is essentially art criticism (Feldman, 1976, p. 348). The “power of verbal discourse in the process of knowing in art” (Hughes, 1991, p. 76), is recognized in this study. All of the new Saskatchewan curricula, including arts education, emphasize development of language skills. The curricular focus on the integration of language instruction, as well as a trend towards an integrated approach to learning across areas of study, has presented the opportunity to consider linkages between theories that may be applicable across disciplines such as reader-response theory in literature teaching, and viewer-response theory in art criticism. Most importantly this study may provide insight into how educators can facilitate student access to art by guiding them as they learn how to make meaning from art, to express understandings, and potentially benefit from participation in visual art throughout their lives. It is not so often the case that we can learn in the presence of compelling objects that engage our senses, allow for many kinds of cognition, connect to many facets of life, sustain our attention, and so on. Art is an opportunity. Let us not miss it. (Perkins, 1994, p. 5) The Viewing Process Instructional Model Curriculum Context The idea that all students, not just the “talented” or privileged students, should be educated in the arts, is basic to the philosophy of the Saskatchewan Arts Education curriculum. An inclusive program, designed to address the art educational needs of all students, is “broad in scope and includes a diverse range of arts experiences” (Saskatchewan Learning, 1991, p. 5). According to the curriculum, arts experiences in a balanced program present opportunities for learning within three integrated components: creative/productive, critical/responsive, and cultural/historical. The critical/responsive component, where students learn to “become willing participants in the inter-active process between artist and audience rather than passive consumers of the arts” (p. 7), is essentially art criticism. The provincial curriculum philosophy and three-component approach to art education is compatible with discipline-based art education. Discipline-based art education is a movement that has developed over the last two decades by visual art educators and scholars. Art history, art criticism, art-making and aesthetics are the four disciplines upon which discipline-based art education (DBAE) programs are built. “It is the disciplines of art that provide the basic knowledge, skills, and understanding that enables students to have broad and rich experiences with works of art” (Dobbs, 1998, p. 3). The three components of the Saskatchewan curriculum encompass content from all four art disciplines. The approach to the disciplines shared by both the Saskatchewan curriculum and DBAE is that they are “fluid, shifting, and intermingling with one another” (p. 4). The Getty Education Institute for the Arts, established in Los Angeles in 1982 by the J. Paul Getty Trust, is a major proponent of DBAE and has spearheaded extensive research in art education in the United States (Dobbs, 1998). DBAE has generated a great deal of healthy debate in art education (Eisner, 1988). Hamblen (1989), Hausmann (1987), Jagodzinski (1997) and Lanier (1987) have taken issue with what they perceive as an elitist, eurocentric and overly formalist stance in the Getty's presentation of DBAE. Whereas Chalmers (1996), Dobbs (1998) and Eisner (1988), among others, argue that balanced discipline-based and multicultural approaches are compatible means of organizing art instruction. The fact that much of the commercial resource material produced for classroom use is now designed for integrated discipline-based art programs is indicative of the growing popularity of this approach. Based on the research presented, I have suggested that art can be made more accessible to students by adopting an inclusive approach to what art is included, and how it is studied, in the classroom. The other side of the accessibility coin is the issue of empowering students to have life-long meaningful encounters with art by providing the learning opportunities that will nurture development of the attitudes, skills and abilities to interpret and respond to art. Opportunity for critical response is within the discipline of art criticism. Tom Anderson (1991) defines art criticism as: a direct personal encounter with a specific work of art resulting in linguistic analysis and/or interpretation of the work. This analysis and/or interpretation is, more or less, informed opinion, based on evidence, and funded within a given cultural context (p. 18). The Antecedents Numerous key instructional models designed to help guide students to a meaningful interpretation and understanding of visual art have been presented to art educators over the past few decades. These instructional models are all based on interpretations of the process that professional art critics go through as they respond to art. Popular texts such as Elliot Eisner's Educating Artistic Vision (1972), Edmund Feldman's Becoming Human Through Art (1976), and Laura Chapman's Approaches to Art in Education (1978) all advocate including art response as a legitimate and important component of a balanced art education program, and include descriptions of instructional models intended for use in the classroom. Elliot Eisner has written extensively on the theory and practice of art education. In Educating Artistic Vision (1972), Eisner identifies six “dimensions” of critical response which serve as frames of reference for the viewer: experiential, formal, symbolic, thematic, material, and contextual (p. 107). Eisner later promotes the idea of “connoisseurship” in art criticism education (1979) and the inclusion of learning experiences in art criticism as fundamental to “Discipline-Based Art Education” programs (1991). Feldman's “techniques of art criticism”, consists of four steps the teacher can follow to guide students in their viewing: description, formal analysis, interpretation and judgment (1976, p. 348). This relatively straightforward model can be easily adapted to accommodate children at all levels of ability. The instructional model in the Saskatchewan curriculum is largely drawn from Feldman's practical model for using the viewing process in the classroom. Chapman acknowledges that “we cannot teach children to appreciate art [but] we can teach them a critical process through which they can develop, test and refine their own artistic judgments” (1978, p. 80). She describes four different critical processes for viewing art: inductive, deductive, empathetic and interactive (Chapman, 1978, p. 80). The inductive model Chapman describes is similar to Feldman's four-step model. Ralph Smith proposes “some approximation of the critic's expertise into an objective for aesthetic education. . .” and, like Feldman, advocates the use of the same four-step model with an emphasis on the inclusion of “art-historical data” within the first descriptive step (1968, p. 21). Enlightened Cherishing: An Essay on Aesthetic Education (1972), by Harry Broudy, describes the “Aesthetic Scanning” model which consists of a three-step analysis of a work of art. The steps include sensory properties, formal properties and expressive properties. Viewing art is described by Vincent Lanier (1976a) as a process of proceeding through nine screens in which “each screen represents a factor that influences how one sees a work of art, or what one thinks about as he [she] looks at art” (p. 55). Lanier's holistic model pays particular attention to the context of the viewing situation and its effect on the viewer's experience of art. A method to “systematically incorporate the intuitive and affective with the intellectual and analytic components of seeing and understanding works of art” is presented by Tom Anderson (1988, p. 28). Anderson's model consists of seven “stages”: 1) reaction, 2) representation, 3) formal analysis, 4) formal characterization, 5) personal interpretation, 6) contextual examination and, 7) synthesis. Anderson's model was used, along with Feldman's model, as the basis of the process adopted by Saskatchewan Art Education curriculum writers for guiding students in their response to art. Bersson (1991) prefers Feldman's model and considers a primarily formal response as a “natural starting place” to be followed by a “broader contextual understanding of the work, based on commentary by the artist, art historians and social scientists [which] would build on that initial personal experience, making for an increasingly rich and complex appreciation” (p. 10). Maureen Price (1994) concurs with Bersson when she states that “formal analysis of the visually given must therefore serve as an entry point to that which otherwise risks being inaccessible” (p. 116). Dennis Fehr (1994) suggests an “Historical Context Model” for viewing art activities which “places an examination of the historical and social context of the production of the work of art before any formal analysis or interpretation” (p. 199). Fehr's argument is similar to Smith's earlier appeal to art educators to pay foremost attention to the historical context of art. As a compromise between the “historical-context-first” versus the “formal-analysis- first” positions, it may be more constructive to order the steps according to the characteristics of the artwork under discussion and/or the immediate interests and needs of the viewer. Some works of art, such as historical narratives or allegorical paintings, demand that attention to be paid to the social-cultural-historical contexts, whereas some abstract art, such as minimalist sculpture, may demand formal analysis first. Once the initial need is satiated then the viewer is in the position to take the time to proceed to the other areas of reflection and savour the complete exploration of the work. Ralph Smith's statement is pertinent to any consideration of instructional models: Critical activity may be described first of all in terms of overlapping phases which contain statements ranging from cognitively certain to the cognitively less certain. . .. The division is open to challenge since the terms are used ambiguously and the boundaries between phases are not always precise (1968, p. 21). Learning how to respond critically to images is facilitated in the classroom through questioning. Karen Hamblen's (1984) review of research on questioning strategies indicates that properly sequenced instructional questions promote the development of complex levels of cognition. She identifies the lack of attention paid to critical response as problematic to art education and stresses the need to incorporate problem-solving activity through the description and interpretation of art. Goals which would have the teacher pose questions and create situations that allow the student to identify and investigate problems remain essentially prescriptive rather than descriptive of much classroom practice (Hamblen, 1984, p. 41). Hamblen presents an art criticism model that implements a questioning strategy developed within the framework of Bloom's taxonomy (Appendix B) It is proposed that Bloom's taxonomy provides a framework for sequenced analytical and problem-solving learning that is consistent with current but more generalized art criticism formats (p. 42). The questioning strategy Hamblem presents is organized according to Feldman's four-part format and is intended to offer teachers “a much needed specificity to current art criticism” (p. 46). The examples of questions that Hamblen provides is helpful to teachers as they guide students through the critical response process. The Curriculum Model Elements of all of the instructional models briefly outlined above can be seen within the seven-step viewing process model, “Viewing Art Works” included in the Arts Education curriculum (Saskatchewan Education,1991a, p. 316). (Appendix A). The steps listed in the curriculum guide are: preparation, first impression, description, analysis, interpretation, background information, and informed judgment (p. 317). The critical/responsive component is intended to enable students to respond critically to images. In the curriculum document response is considered to be an “interactive process” that will lead to “informed personal interpretation” (p. 8). The model is clearly a blend of Feldman's four-step model (1976), and Anderson's seven-step model (1988). Anderson's “reaction” and “contextual examination” steps have been added as “first impressions” and “background information” respectively. The addition of these steps to Feldman's basic four steps, along with the initial “preparation” step, may help to clarify the process, especially for non-art specialists. The first step in the “Viewing Art Works” process is called “preparation”. It is meant as time to prepare the class for viewing a work of art. Teachers are to encourage students to express themselves, and remind them to respect each other's opinions; “that we all look at the same work through different eyes” (Saskatchewan Learning 1991a, p. 317). Step two, “first impressions”, has been taken from Anderson's model. This step is intended to give students “the opportunity to air or record their first spontaneous reaction to a work” (p. 317), and thus avoid frustration that may arise if they are denied the opportunity for this initial expression. This step acknowledges the fact that we do have an initial reaction to a work, and gets it out in the open so that the process can proceed beyond the initial response. Anderson (1988) stresses the need for the expression of a “strong intuitive and affective response to a work of art” in which the viewer is answering the question of “how does the work make me feel?” (p. 29). He also warns us that words such as “good” or “bad” should be avoided since “normative judgments are premature at this point” (p. 30). Anderson's warning points to the controversy surrounding the inclusion of this step in the response model. Feldman clearly states that the way to avoid the mistake of “jumping to conclusions” is to start right away on the description -- making a list of what you see, thereby slowing yourself down and giving yourself the time necessary to make an informed decision about the work (1976, p. 349). Hermine Feinstein also cautions us not to dwell on any expression of preference since “they tend to close perceptions prematurely” (1989, p. 99). The onus is on the teacher to facilitate the response process and try to keep discussion open. The initial reaction does not have to be a value judgment or an expression of preference. It may be a word to express a feeling or element of art such as “sad” or “smooth shapes”, or a phrase referring to some personal association with the subject such as “fishing with Grampa”. The initial reaction can serve as a “hook” for the students, open up discussion and invite them into deeper analysis. Like Tom Anderson, Maureen Price contends that this pre-critical response is the point of access for development of critical skills: The expression of spontaneous and unrationalized reactions to the visually given . . . will initiate discussion. . .Subjective and empirical responses, stated without inhibition, serve to raise a perplexity of attitudes, expectations and feelings which will need to be clarified, thus leading to the consideration of meanings within the image. (1991, p. 115). The next three steps are very similar to Feldman's model. Step three, “description” is what Feldman refers to as the “process of listing” or taking inventory of what can be seen including the images, symbols, elements of art, techniques, and materials employed. Step four, “analysis” involves finding out what the artist has done to achieve certain effects -- how the artist used the elements of art and principles of design. Step four focuses on the formal intellectual level of response. In the fifth step, “interpretation”, the viewer tries to figure out what the work is about by drawing on personal perspectives and associations which connect to evidence found in the work. Understanding gained through all of the steps contributes to the viewer's interpretation or construction of meaning. “Background information”, the sixth step, provides the opportunity to explore the social-cultural-historical contexts of the artist and the work. This step explicitly addresses art historical content and knowledge. Dennis Fehr (1993) believes that placing a work in its historical context is so important in understanding the work that it deserves its own category in any criticism model -- and that category should be first so that all further discussion is done in light of it (p. 199). The last step, “informed judgment”, is a time to reflect on all that has been discovered through the preceding steps and come to an informed decision about the value of the work for each viewer. In this step the student may look back to his/her first impression of the work and identify reasons why their feelings about the work have, or have not, changed. The value of this step, as with “first impressions”, is contingent upon the other steps. “The ability to evaluate is a by-product of genuine criticism and not its primary objective” (Sloan, 1975, p. 15). Laura Chapman states that educators should nurture students' skills in “judging the kind and degree of value the work might hold for themselves and others” (1978, p. 90). She goes on to say that skill in making critical judgment is “neither a retreat to personal preference nor a blind acceptance of prejudgments by others” (p. 89). Tom Anderson prefers the term “synthesis” to “judgment” and defines the final stage of art criticism as “the act of creatively combining the descriptive and analytical components and their resulting personal interpretations with expert opinion and arriving at an evaluation of a work. . . significance should be determined by the aesthetic power of the image in it's relationship to that particular viewer” (1988, p. 35). I was doubtful that grade four students would have the ability to read and understand “expert opinion” let alone combine it with their own interpretation. That task seemed more appropriate for older students. But the idea of identifying personal significance, with their opinions backed up by their own experience with the work appeared to be a feasible approach for any grade level to this last step in the viewing process. Forms of Response Students may respond to art images in a variety of ways or modes including talk, writing, dance, drama, music and visual art. This study focussed on oral and written response. “Students [need] to engage continually in the exchange of ideas, to be involved in dialogues of different kinds. They need to talk to each other, and to us as teachers, and they need to exchange ideas through writing” (Haussen, Harste and Short, 1990, p. 261). Wells asserts that “in a very important sense education is dialogue. . . ” (1992, p. 32). Art criticism is talk -- spoken or written -- about art (Feldman, 1976, p. 348). Lessons that focus on critical response and that integrate art and language, enhance learning in both the linguistic and aesthetic domains. “If children see art, read, speak, and write about art, and listen to discussions about art, they are practising what is useful to them in art and in learning to command language” (Chapman, 1982, p. 136). Young children need regular opportunities to describe what they see, to react to works of art with their own feelings, and to reflect upon the variety of interpretations found within works of art. . . As children respond to works of art with their developing attitudes, beliefs, values and feelings, discussions will help them to sharpen their perceptual and sensory awareness and, thus, positively influence their own artistic productions. (Irwin quoted in Clark, 1995, p. 68). Irwin recognizes that the viewing experience is not an end in itself but is a part of a cycle of experience which includes the mutually supportive activities of art-making, reflection, and response. Journals are “useful pedagogical tools . . . where critical independent thought, speculation and exploration is important” (Fulwiler, 1987, p. 1). The theories about language and learning that form the basis of journal use in the classroom are drawn from Bruner, Vygotsky, Emig and Britton (p. 5). Written response to art is similar to written response to literature in that entries “become the seedbed for further reflection and are the raw data to be tested against the reading of the text by peers, the teacher and perhaps the critics” (Gambell, 1993, p. 41). Responses from steps two through seven in the viewing art works process in the curriculum guide may be expressed in writing. Journals can also be the location for writing within Chapman's three phases of response to art -- perception, interpretation and judgment (Chapman, 1978, p. 90). Dialogue journals provide a means for authentic writing experience within visual art education. The student writes a response to a work of art and the teacher, or another student, reflects on the entry and writes a brief reply in the journal -- a written “conversation” about the artwork develops (Isaacs and Brodine, 1994, p. 18). Dialogue journal entries may be written as letters to the reader, “conceived as first-draft chat, not polished pieces of writing” (Atwell, 1987, p. 167). This study is, in turn, essentially a reflection on the oral and written conversation that generated from the students' response to art, and the teacher's response to implementing the instructional model in her classroom. Concluding Remarks The “Viewing Art Works” process used in this study is outlined in the provincial curriculum guide (1991, p. 316), and evolved from the work of scholars in art education such as Feldman (1976), Eisner (1972), Chapman (1978) and Anderson (1988). An emphasis on the acquisition of visual literacy and cognitive development through perceptually and intellectually challenging inquiry into art is fundamental to all of the instructional models I reviewed. The concept of the “intelligent eye” also contemplates extensive mental functioning in the exercise of art, especially in looking at and thinking about images. This is contrary to the belief that art has little intellectual content and is primarily about feelings. There are methods, moreover, teachable in schools, through which students can learn to see and understand the content in works of art that had been invisible to the untrained eye (Dobbs, 1998, p. 9). Activities designed to support and encourage student response to art facilitate the development of the “intelligent eye”. The steps of the viewing process must be adjusted to accommodate the needs, interests and abilities of the students viewing the work, and the particular characteristics of the artwork under discussion. What really happens in art criticism cannot be reduced to a formula. . .. What really happens in art criticism relies heavily on that flash of insight based on gut feelings, life experiences, and perceptual information coming together just right. Yet, having said this, it is good to have conceptual structures on which to base inquiry. If the living substance of art criticism forms in that place where careful observation and the leap of imagination come together, then the platform for a leap should be carefully constructed, especially for pedagogical purposes (Anderson, 1988, p. 29). The reasons for using an instructional model for viewer-response are the same as the reasons presented by Robert Probst for literature-response: to slow down the reading, encouraging productive pauses. . . to provide helpful responses -- prods, questions and reactions -- that might stimulate further thoughts about reading . . . to encourage some collegiality among students to cast them into the role of helper for one another, while giving some guidance in that role. . . and invite them to come to know one another better (Probst, 1992, p. 69). Overview My research into art education was mainly designed along the guidelines for qualitative research developed by Eisner (1993), Patton (1990) and Kemmis and McTaggart (1988). In The Emergence of New Paradigms for Educational Research (1993) Elliot Eisner places art education research definitely within the qualitative paradigm. In Qualitative Evaluation and Research Methods (1990), Michael Quinn Patton explains many topics pertinent to this study. I found Patton's section on qualitative analysis and interpretation of data particularly useful. Lincoln and Guba's Naturalistic Inquiry (1985), and Lancy's Qualitative Research in Education (1983) also provided an orientation to the qualitative research process. The Enlightened Eye: Qualitative Inquiry and the Enhancement of Educational Practice, by Elliot Eisner (1991), is particularly relevant to this study because of Eisner's focus on the arts as “paradigm cases of qualitative intelligence in action” (p.6). This research project is basically consistent with the theory of action research described by Kemmis and McTaggart (1988), who explain the nature of action research as a spiral or recursive process of planning, acting, observing and reflecting (p. 11). This study is modified from the format described by Kemmis and McTaggart since the teacher was not initially involved in the determination of the purpose and objectives of the research, but was invited to participate during the data collection phase. Data Collection Participants The Teacher. This was a collaborative research project in which Cheryle, a grade four teacher, worked with me to explore the questions outlined earlier. She acted as co-researcher during the data-collection phase of the study. We collaborated to design and plan the classroom implementation of the instructional model. Cheryle also reviewed data and provided feedback on the findings. Cheryle was invited to participate on the advice of the school principal who was aware of the various projects the teachers were already involved in. At the time of the study Cheryle was starting her sixth year of teaching. She taught all of the grade four areas of study except for Physical Education and Cree Language (which were taught by specialists). Cheryle had been involved in implementing the four strands of the elementary arts education curriculum for five years. Students. The teacher-participant assisted me with a purposeful sampling of four students from her grade four class at the local elementary school. We selected two boys and two girls. They were all nine years old and spoke English as their first language. Researcher. At the time that this study began I had worked for the school division for fifteen years -- nine years as an art teacher in La Loche and Deschambault Lake, and six years as an educational consultant out of the central office. I had been a pilot teacher for the arts education curriculum and had facilitated the implementation inservices in our division in 1991-1992. I participated in the research by working collaboratively with the teacher, Cheryle, assisting her with unit and lesson planning and the selection of visual images. I observed her art lessons and wrote responses to the students' entries in their art response journals. I conducted interviews with the four student participants and discussed the data collected from the activities with Cheryle. The Site This study was located in a 400-pupil elementary school in a large community in northern Saskatchewan. Upon first entering Cheryle's classroom I had the general impression of a bright, busy space. The fairly large room had tall windows, shelves displaying resource materials, some activity centres, and a sink as well as a bathroom. The students' desks were in horizontal rows and student work was displayed on the bulletin boards. The Data Collection Process Data Sources. Data were collected from the four students by audio-taping and transcribing interviews with the students. Field notes were taken from classroom observations and meetings with student participants. Photocopies of student response journal entries were made. Quotes from the students' journals are presented in italics. I have used verbatim quotes from the participants, choosing not to change spelling, grammar or syntax because I believe it is important to hear the responses in their own words to get a sense of how they grappled with expression of their ideas and feelings. Data collected from the teacher was in the form of field notes from our meetings and observations of lessons, answers to interview questions, and photocopies of selected entries from the teacher's personal reflective journal. My own reflections on the study that were recorded in my personal journal, as well as anecdotal records, were also sources of data. A main source of data were notes taken from the reflective discussions that took place between the teacher and me as we have reviewed the research data, the research process, and problems and issues that arose. Throughout this study I kept a day-to-day log and audit trail of activities. Data collection included two semi-structured interviews with the teacher and four semi-structured interviews with the four student participants between September 1997 and December 1997. For each of the interviews I used a list of questions to help guide discussion. Since the form and content of the questions I asked largely depended on the response given to the previous questions, each interview was different. I did not want to be restricted by the questions but used them to coax response. If I sensed that the students or teacher wanted to talk I tried not to cut them off with a listed question that my not have been immediately relevant. I sometimes added more probing questions, or explained the questions more, to try to draw out the respondent's feelings and ideas. Phase One: Setting Up. This was a modified action research project since the teacher was not initially involved in the selection of the “thematic concern” (Kemmis and McTaggart, 1988 p. 9) -- how to improve art education pedagogy re: students' access to art. Preliminary plans for the study were formulated before the teacher was invited to participate. At the end of the summer of 1997 Cheryle and I met to plan the details of the classroom implementation phase of the research process. Two informal meetings helped us get acquainted and served as an orientation for both of us. I introduced Cheryle to the tentative outline for the research process and stressed that the outline was only meant as a guide to help her understand the design of the study and that her input into the planning was crucial. I explained that the plans would change as the study unfolded, and provided information regarding the theory and research in which the study was grounded. At the beginning of the school year, on September 5th, I conducted a semi-structured interview with Cheryle to help reveal her general attitude and beliefs about art and art education, level of comfort and knowledge of the Arts Education curriculum, and pertinent background information relating to training and interests. She was encouraged to ask questions and share her ideas and concerns about the study. Through our follow-up discussions I gained some insight into the teaching/learning styles of the teacher and students. In two subsequent meetings prior to the commencement of the classroom implementation phase of the study, I helped Cheryle become familiar with the selected viewing process model and we started to plan together. We chose a unit theme, began to develop a 10 week unit plan and relevant lesson plans, acquired resources and support materials --including the tentative selection of art works (Appendix C) -- and set up a timetable for the implementation phase of the study. The four student participants were first individually interviewed on September 12th, prior to classroom implementation to collect data on their general attitude or feelings towards art, art in school, oral and written self-expression, information on their background, and prior experience with art. The students were also shown a work of art and their oral responses recorded. After expression of their initial response they were asked questions relating to the various levels of response and context of the work (formal, historical, social, personal-subjective) in order to establish a baseline level of response for each student-participant. These interviews provided insight into the personal and interpersonal dynamics of the classroom which could affect response to art activities. The participants and I became acquainted, and the students gained a sense of who they would be writing to in their art response dialogue journals. Phase Two: Focused Exploration. A timetable was created that featured one art response lesson per week over a 10 week period from September 19th to December 5th. The teacher introduced the model for viewing art to the class. I observed and took field notes on each lesson focusing on response to art. Observations and notes were directed mainly at the four student participants. During these lessons the teacher facilitated student response by using the instructional model to guide the class through the steps of the viewing process, in group and individual activities. The whole class either began, or followed up, the viewing experiences by writing reflective responses in their dialogue journals at least once a week. I participated in the dialogue about art by replying in writing to the journal entries of the four student participants. The teacher chose to write responses in the dialogue journals of the other students. The students in the class occasionally exchanged journals and wrote replies to each other. A second interview with the individual student participants was conducted half-way through the unit, on October 23rd, in the teacher resources room in the library. The focus of this half hour meeting was to assess the student's level of awareness and application of the viewing process. Each student was asked to respond orally to an unfamiliar work of art. The third interview, on November 13th, was held with the four students together in a small group. We had borrowed a bright little room just off the library which was the tutors' office. I had intended to facilitate a discussion about the work in a “talking-circle” format (Saskatchewan Education, 1994b, p. 4), but I quickly abandoned that idea when the format proved to be too formal for such a small group of students who knew each other so well. The discussion flowed back and forth between the four students and myself for about forty minutes. The fourth meeting, back in the teacher's resource room, took place at the end of the unit on December 4th. Each student was individually interviewed with questions relating to those asked at the first interview. This last meeting began with written response followed by discussion. Questions to elicit feedback on their feelings about being involved with the study, were asked. Cheryle and I kept closely in touch throughout this classroom phase of the study. I often sent notes and resources to her via the division's school mail system. As a consultant I spend a great deal of my time travelling to schools across the whole northern half of the province, but during the study I was able to plan my trips out of town so that I was back each week by Thursday evening. We met every Friday morning during the teaching of the unit to discuss the afternoon art response lesson and to finish plans for the next lesson. She was apprised of my observations, which I had recorded in the field notes. Both of us kept personal journals to record our reflections on the research experience. We shared reflections from our journals and discussed the progress of the study. Cheryle's insight and weekly feedback contributed valuable data, provided a catalyst for reflection on instruction, and helped us to plan subsequent activities. After the completion of the ten week unit, I composed a questionnaire to help guide Cheryle's reflections on the implementation process and her involvement in the study. Since December was a very busy time of year for teachers I sent the questionnaire over to her about a week before our scheduled meeting so that she could ponder the questions whenever it was most convenient for her. We met for lunch on the Sunday before the Christmas holidays to discuss the study and share our reflections on the experience of implementing the viewing process model in Cheryle's grade four classroom -- and to celebrate the completion of the data collection. Selection of Artwork for Viewing The artwork selected for the classroom activities and the interview sessions related to the topics or themes of the units of study that the teacher and I planned. Choice was also based on our perception of the needs and interests of the students and teacher, as well as the curriculum requirements. Even though it was not practical to allow for individual choice, some general preferences were identified and accommodated. Students were introduced to new images to broaden their experience and develop perceptual abilities (Chapman,1978, p. 65). Some parameters for selection were set initially, and I kept in mind that adjustments were always possible. I wanted Cheryle to make the final decisions about what images would be used since she was the one who would be presenting the lessons. To ease the pressure on Cheryle who did not have the time to search for images, I supplied several works from which she could choose for each lesson. We considered our own observations as well as some of the research into the preferences of students. For example, if “in the preadolescent stage children are often interested in finely crafted work that shows a high degree of technical skill” (Chapman p. 195), then works of art that were rich in fine detail and had a strong narrative content such as certain fantasy or surrealistic images were appropriate for study (Hurwitz and Day, 1991, p. 312). Effort was made to include works of art by male and female artists from various cultures, past and present were selected (Appendix C). Selection of images was confined to those resources that classroom teachers would most likely have access to, such as: self-collected images from the media, calendars, posters and illustrated storybooks; Art First Nations (Zuk and Bergland,1992) and Art Image (Briere,1985) print kits from Art Image Publications; and, various slide kits that Saskatchewan Learning has provided to schools such as Saskatchewan Art Works (1991), and Inuit, Metis and Indian Art (Noble,1991). Data Analysis The seven steps in the viewing process instructional model outlined in the Saskatchewan Arts Education curriculum guide (1991a, p. 316), are: preparation, first impressions, description, analysis, interpretation, background information and informed judgment (Appendix A). As a first step towards analysis I transcribed the taped student interviews. I then coded the students' oral and written responses by numbering them to correspond to the steps in the viewing process. The students' responses to art were further examined to reveal their attitudes, skills and abilities as they sought to construct meaning. The responses that demonstrated these attitudes, skills and abilities were colour coded and categorized according to the “foundational” objectives, and corresponding learning objectives, of the visual arts strand in Arts Education: a Curriculum Guide for Grade 4 (Saskatchewan Learning, 1991a, p. 319). Embedding the analysis within the curriculum objectives highlighted the desired practical nature of this study. Growth towards the attainment of these objectives became evident as responses were made public through the viewing process. Student responses, examined through the lens of the curriculum objectives, helped us to measure the value of the viewing process as an instructional model. Examination of the data revealed emergent themes that do not fall within the curriculum objectives. With scissors and tape in hand I proceeded to cut and paste the data into a patchwork quilt of themes. I used schematic maps and flow charts to help keep track of all of the interrelated data. Themes were coded and analyzed according to their relevance and relative impact on the purpose and objectives of this study. The teacher's personal reflective journal and other data relating to the teacher's experience implementing the viewing process in her classroom, such as the notes from our meetings and observations of lessons, were examined. The teacher data was coded by number and colour and sorted according to emergent themes relating to the second purpose of this study, which was to find out if the instructional model “works” from a teacher's point of view. Themes relating to the feasibility of generalist teachers using the viewing process were identified. The use of different data collection techniques such as tape recording interviews, photocopying journal entries and compiling lesson and meeting observation notes contributed to the validity of the study. “It is in data analysis that the strategy of triangulation really pays off” (Patton, p. 464). Ethical Considerations I assigned pseudonyms to the student participants and deleted the name of the school to ensure confidentiality of the data collected. (The teacher, as a co-researcher, expressed a wish not to have her name changed.) Letters were sent to the parents of the student participants to clarify the purpose of the research and the manner in which it would be conducted. Each of the four student participants and their parents were informed of the research purpose and the kinds of activities they would be involved in. The four students, their parents, and the teacher were informed that participation was voluntary and withdrawal was possible at any time without penalty or prejudice. Written permission was given by the Director of Education, the Board of Education, the Principal of the school, the teacher, and the parents of the four student participants. Participants and parents had access to all interview transcripts and photocopies of student journal pages. Audio tapes will be destroyed following completion of the research. Parents were asked to specify any restrictions on artwork. They could also preview the artwork selected for use in the study, on request. Artwork for student response was chosen very carefully in consultation will the teacher. It was understood that if the students appeared disturbed or upset by the images used in a lesson the activity was stopped and another image was substituted. A copy of a report on the study is available, on request, to parents. Introduction In this chapter the findings are divided into three parts. Each part presents factors affecting student access to art. The first part is an analysis of the viewing process as revealed through the data collected from viewing activities with the students. Part two is an analysis of themes emerging from the data relating to student response to art. The third part deals with themes emerging from the data collected from the teacher on her experience implementing the viewing process instructional model. Over the ten week period of research in the classroom Cheryle and I had the opportunity to witness how the viewing process instructional model was transformed from the seven steps neatly listed in the curriculum document into a fluid, dynamic form that was used to illuminate the way for the teacher and students as they encountered art. Response to art did not follow a predictable sequence but flowed in many directions between the viewers and works of art. Since the four students selected for the interview group were also members of the class in which the selected instructional model was implemented during art lessons, their experiences are inextricably linked to those of the teacher and the rest of the class. Student quotations are from transcribed taped interviews, notes from lesson observations, and student journal entries; all were collected between September 1997 and December 1997. The quotations taken from the student journals are in italics to differentiate them from the oral responses. Part One: Viewing Process Analysis The viewing process was repeated through a variety of activities over the ten week period of the study. In this first part of the data analysis the student responses from the whole ten week period are categorized according to the seven steps outlined in the curriculum guide in an attempt to channel the wide body of data for analysis and presentation. In reality the responses did not fall sequentially into these steps. The analysis of the viewing process through an examination of the students' responses revealed evidence of the development of knowledge, skills and abilities required to gain access to art. The curriculum foundational objectives encompass these requirements. The viewing process was examined step by step to determine how the students' responses demonstrate realization of the curriculum objectives. Preparation “Preparation” is the first step in the seven-step viewing process as it is outlined in the Saskatchewan Arts Education curriculum guide. Before students are shown the work of art it is necessary to “establish a climate for viewing” by encouraging students to express their opinions and reminding them to value and respect the contributions of themselves and others (Saskatchewan Learning, 1991a, p. 317). In this study, the teacher, Cheryle, used this step as an opportunity to clarify expectations for the class. At the beginning of each lesson she briefly reviewed the viewing process with the students and introduced them to the lesson's agenda. Cheryle explained the process with enthusiasm, stressing the “exploration” aspect and using the phrase “You and I” (lesson #1 notes, Sept.19, 1997) to draw attention to the idea that they were all going on a journey of discovery as they viewed the work of art. Students were told what equipment, props and materials were going to be used. The set-up of the room, the seating arrangements, the lighting, and the displays of books and pictures about art and artists on bulletin boards and counters, all contribute to the establishment of a climate conducive to viewing art. Word lists, or “banks” of descriptive words the students had compiled for the elements of art, were posted. A poster outlining the seven steps in the viewing process was also on display for the teacher and students, to help guide discussion. Students were encouraged to take risks and express themselves. Cheryle outlined the kind of respectful behaviour that was necessary for people to want to share their ideas, feelings and opinions, and modelled that behaviour herself. She often reminded them that she was “very interested in knowing what you think, your ideas” (lesson #1 notes, Sept. 19, 1997). This first step also provided an opportunity for the review of concepts from earlier lessons. The new image was often introduced by making connections to previously viewed images: “Remember when we looked at the portrait of Daniel? Now we're going to look at another portrait made by a different artist. . .” (lesson #2 notes, Sept. 26, 1997). A lesson focusing on narrative art, for instance, started with a review of elements discussed and viewed in earlier lessons: texture, pattern, value, point-of-view, and use of space. Pre-viewing activities that constitute this preparation stage are similar to pre-writing activities or pre-reading activities because they build interest and allow students to share what they already know. For example, for the lesson on masks the students were asked what kinds of masks they know of, and who wears them. The students generated a much longer list than Cheryle and I had come up with earlier. There was also a discussion of masks used in movies such as Batman, Star Wars and The Mask. Similarly, in a lesson that focused on the artist's use of light and shadow, students brainstormed a long list of different kinds of light sources. Using pre-viewing activities, interest was heightened through the connections made to the students' own experience, thereby setting the stage for the viewing activity to follow. First Impression Although “First Impression” is the second step in the viewing process, it is the first chance the students have to actually interact with the work of art, and express their initial reactions. The first impressions step is included in the viewing process described in the curriculum because “everyone has such reactions and denying students the opportunity to express them will cause frustration” (Saskatchewan Education, 1991a, p. 317). This step may also give the teacher an insightful glimpse into the students' attitudes and contextual knowledge and provide a starting point for questioning and discussion. In this study, the first impressions expressed by the students were usually brief descriptive comments about the images or about the formal elements in the work. They did not summarize their impressions into an overall feeling or idea. The naming, or labelling that occurs when students respond to the work, falls within Laura Chapman's first level of response: perceiving obvious and subtle qualities (Chapman, 1978, p. 67). The data provide examples of the blurred boundaries between steps: usually the first impressions are really part of the next step, which is the description of the work. Sometimes the students' first impressions show an element of judgment as well. Charles' and Brandi's first impression of Jeune Comedien by Alfred Pellan expressed an admiration for the realism in the work. Brandi remarked that “the face looks real, like a real face. Like the face looks real and everything else looks like it was just like, painted. . . like out of a magazine or something.” Jack was struck by “how the hat looks”. Later, he marvelled at its realistic “3D” quality. Morgan pointed out the obvious: “he has a hat” and “he's smoking a pipe.” In the classroom with their teacher, the students were asked to share their first impressions of Daniel Crommelin Verplanck, a portrait by J.S.Copley. Reactions included comments such as “it stands out” and “it looks so real”. In the lesson that followed, the students viewed two very expressive, colourful portraits by Arthur Shilling and, this time, were asked to write down their first impressions in their art response journals. Cheryle reminded the class they could use the lists of descriptive words posted on the back wall. The students wrote down their observations such as “bright colours”, “thick lines” , “curvy lines” and “lots of faces”. After making their lists, the students had the opportunity to take turns coming up to the slide image on the screen and pointing out to the rest of the class some of the things they had noticed. This activity generated lively discussion as the students continued to carefully examine the images. The first impressions and the descriptions were blended together. The use of adjectives to explain the qualities of the elements also showed the beginnings of analysis. A few weeks into the study, the students were asked to record their first impressions of a painting by Picasso. But, when the print Head of a Weeping Woman with Handkerchief was revealed and before pencils were set to paper, there were gasps of surprise, lots of “ohs” and “wows”, some laughter, and even an “oh my God!” Jack wrote in his response journal: “My first impression of this painting are the eyes were crooked and the person has sharp teeth and was sad, mad.” Morgan thought that “it was funny and it had a hat I think it is having a heart attack”. Charles, who is usually quiet and shy, reacted very strongly to the work and made it clear that he judged it to be repulsive. He angrily wrote: “My first impression of this painting was the gibild fase and the snote.” Comments such as these provided the teacher with a starting point, an opportunity to extend the inquiry with questions such as: what are the various effects the work has on us? why does the work have those effects? and, “why did the artist decide to paint it like that?” (lesson #3 notes, Oct. 3, 1997). Answering these questions elicited further discussion. First impressions generally included an exclamation of some kind, which did not change over the course of the study (“awesome”, “wow” and “cool” were common reactions). First impressions also included an identification of visual images and elements of art, which was simply naming or labelling obvious features. The data also show how responses cannot be neatly confined to one step but flow into description, analysis, interpretation, and even judgment to various degrees. Minimal time was actually spent on this second step, in both the classroom lessons and the interview sessions. Description For the third step in the viewing process, `Description', the question asked of the viewer is basically “what do you see?” or “what is here?” This is the kind of open-ended question that has the potential to generate a wide array of responses. Responses may vary from rhyming off a list of images, colours, lines and shapes, to the identification of more subtle qualities that include elements of interpretation and judgment. The simple, or “low level” (Hamblen, 1984, p. 42) listing of details is still useful since it slows down the looking and creates an entry-way for discussion. An excerpt from the transcript of the first interview provides an example of the thinking that may occur around listing the obvious. Speculation on painterly technique evolved from Jack's listing of the details in the painting:
Focusing on describing the visual details was also a good opportunity to introduce and reinforce the descriptive vocabulary that is so much a part of the language of art. The students seemed to delight in being as accurate and specific as possible when describing art elements. For example, colours were not simply labelled as “orange” or “red” but were “rusty-orange”, “brownish-red”, “burgundy”, or “peach”. Shapes were “weird”, lines were “squiggly, “zig-zag” and curvy”. Describing what they see in the work was a necessary step in the “looking carefully” process. It was really the first step in the process where an in-depth interaction with the visual image took place. The description step was a chance for transaction to begin, whereas the first impression was an expression of a relatively superficial response from a glance at the work. The observations that were made provided the starting point for further analysis, interpretation and evaluation. The perception of “obvious and subtle qualities” which includes the “discrimination of basic properties” (Chapman, 1978, p. 67 ) addresses the first two foundational objectives listed in the Saskatchewan curriculum guide: to “become visually aware of detail in the natural and constructed environment” and to “understand the elements of visual art ” (Saskatchewan Learning, 1991a, p. 292). The viewing process provided an opportunity for students to hone skills of observation and become aware that visual details contribute to an understanding of the whole (p. 302). In the first lesson, the students pointed out details that contributed to the understanding that the subject, Daniel Crommelin Verplanck, was a child in a wealthy family “long ago”. When the teacher asked if they knew of any boys who dressed like Daniel the replies were a definite “No!” They speculated that “he might be a prince. . . he looks royal. . .”, “his Mom and Dad were rich”, “his clothes look like they might be expensive.” When discussing the setting some students commented: “he's probably at a palace or somebody's big house in the forest,” “he's sitting on the steps of a famous building like that one in Regina,” “he's at a castle in a big mountain” and “at his Gramma's house.” Jack said that Daniel was dressed like Johnny Appleseed --Jack had read a book about him. The students were drawing on their prior knowledge to make meaning from the image. Knowledge could have been gained through first-hand experience -- perhaps someone's “Gramma” does live in a big house -- or through movies and books. The “texture bag” activity was used to develop understanding of the element of texture, and learn vocabulary to describe it. The students may later apply this knowledge to their descriptions of other works of art. The teacher had gathered together a collection of materials that were depicted in the portrait of Daniel Crommelin Verplanck such as fur, brocade, lace, and velvet. The students took turns to reach into the bag, pull out a piece of fabric, and match it where it could be seen in the painting. They described how the fabric felt to the touch and were able to see how the artist had dipicted the texture with paint in the portrait. Description and analysis often blended together in the students' observations. Jack thought that the hat in the Pellan painting looked “really three-dimensional, getting all that shade and stuff. . . you can see the shadows and stuff.” In that one observation Jack not only identified the hat but conveyed his understanding of how the artist achieved the effect of making it look three-dimensional through the use of “shade and stuff”. Jack later pointed out that the artist used colour and tone in other parts of the painting to achieve certain effects: “. . . and that part there, where it's kind of yellow, looks like it's getting some light on it sort of.” A sampling of some of the observations made during the group discussion of the painting by Soroseelutu again shows how description, interpretation and analysis are intertwined:
Interpretation of visual details is a key aspect of a viewer's interaction with the work. There were many instances in classroom discussion, journal writing and interview sessions when students demonstrated how making sense of the details contributes to an understanding of the whole. This can happen if the viewers are given enough time to reflect on what they are looking at, as well as an opportunity to express their ideas. For example, at our second meeting Brandi deduced that the figures in the Mary Cassatt painting Young Mother Sewing were “probably a family that lived in the bush . . . because of the background. You can see trees and grass” and also it was “probably a gloomy day because the background is pretty dark”. When I asked her about the light that seemed to be on the figures she explained that it was “one of those gloomy days when the sun comes out and goes back”. Descriptions of the colours and textures observed in an art work led to discussions that clearly linked the experience of viewing to their own experience with the materials and techniques of art production. The students demonstrated their ability to transfer their knowledge from prior hands-on experience to the art they were viewing. In our first meeting some of the student participants had definite ideas about the medium Pellan used in Jeune Comedien. Charles thought that pastels must have been used.
Even though the painting was not done with pastels the main point is that Charles was drawing on his own experience to make sense of it. Since we were not viewing the real painting, only a glossy print of it, it was quite difficult to determine the medium.
In the classroom discussion of the self portrait by Arthur Shilling the application of the paint was examined: “Up here on his face he took a whole bunch of different colours and dabbed it on his face”. . . “it looks like he did it fast because the colours are kind of messy”. . . “it looks like he spattered paint onto the face” . . . “it took time to paint all those little faces. . .” The Mary Cassatt painting, in which there is also evidence of the expressive application of paint, generated many comments: Brandi: . . . they used lots of colours to get all these colours. Like they just didn't use just one colour. Jack speculated that if he could touch the real painting it would “feel bumpy”. We talked more about the brushstrokes and he told me that a relative who was an artist “paints like that”. In the third interview, which was a small group response session, there was a discussion of technique:
They all had recent classroom experience viewing illustrations by Terry Gallagher, which exhibited a variety of shading techniques, and creating their own pictures using hatching, cross-hatching and stippling. Later in the same session there was a discussion about the materials used by Soroseelutu.
As Edmund Feldman said in 1973 (p. 59), “One kind of information that enables us to talk in an informed way about art is technical experience.” Analysis The fourth step in the viewing process is “Analysis”. At this stage students examine the work to try to figure out how the artist has achieved certain effects; how the artist has combined lines, shapes, colours, textures and images. The third curriculum foundational objective is closely linked with this step. Activities that focus on the analysis of a work of art would address this objective, which states that the student will “develop concepts which will, in later years, lead to an understanding of order in the visual environment” (Saskatchewan Education,1991a, p. 292). If we take the visual environment to include works of art, then this objective would apply. This rather oddly worded objective, (I am not convinced it is necessary to add in later years), includes the development of an understanding of the principles of design: emphasis, balance, movement, repetition, variety, contrast and unity. Artists use the principles of design to achieve visual effects. Analysis involves trying to figure out what the artist did to achieve the effects felt by the viewer. The focus in analysis is on an examination of the visual evidence found in the work, just as it was in the description. It is sometimes useful at this point in the viewing process, to look back at the first impressions to find a direction for analysis. For example, if a student is impressed by the realism in a work, there could be an exploration of how the artist used light, shadow and perspective to depict a three-dimensional form on a two-dimensional surface. Jack thought that the hat the figure in Jeune Comedien was wearing “looks pretty real” and went on to explain how he thought the artist used the paint to show the three-dimensional quality: “. . . darker and lighter colour, and like, the back like first, and you'd go up and up. Like the artist wants it to really stand out to the person or something.” He decided that “it looks kind of three-dimensional throughout the whole picture -- like the chair, the mask, the person, and the hat.” In our second meeting, when we were viewing a print of the painting Young Mother Sewing by Mary Cassatt, I directed the questioning towards a discussion of the emphasis, or focal point, in the work.
One of the empowering features of the viewing process is that there is often no single right answer, but rather, there can be many possible answers to the open-ended questions. For example, when I asked Jack about the design emphasis in the Cassatt painting he pointed to the expressive, loose brushwork on the mother's gown and said, “Here in front -- the brushstrokes”. He seemed quite fascinated with the brushwork, so, for him, that was the focal point, the most important part. Charles also said that “the faces” caught his attention first, and later pointed out that was because they were “in the middle”. I then asked Charles how the artist had arranged the picture so that the subject was emphasized and he explained that she “drew the little boy, girl, in the front.” The concept of formal or symmetrical balance was a focus of the class unit on masks in October. The teacher guided the whole class through viewing activities featuring masks from various cultures. Students were also instructed to consider visual balance when they were creating their own papier-mache masks, and they used balance as a criterion for judgment when they did self and peer evaluations of the completed masks. At the second interview with the student-participants, just before the mask unit started in the classroom, I directed their attention to the concept of formal symmetrical balance, and the idea that artists think about how to arrange or compose their work.
Charles and Jack also identified the basic triangular composition of the Cassatt piece. Jack traced the shape with his finger on the print to show me exactly what he saw. By the third interview Charles felt confident enough about his understanding of balance to offer a suggestion for how Soroseelutu could have made his painting more symmetrically balanced: “I think he needs to show this [part] more in the middle.” He pointed to the areas in the print that he thought should be changed. The other students nodded in agreement. I made note of the possible danger of the students using symmetrical balance as a criterion for evaluation rather than just as a factor that contributes to the analysis. When we were talking about why the artist arranged the picture the way he did, Jack supposed that “maybe that's there to fill that up, to fill that space up” indicating that he understood possible compositional considerations. Large group, small group, and individual viewing activities were used in the classroom lessons. “Buddy” activities where two students examined a print together and then reported their findings, worked very well. From an examination with his partner of an illustration by Terry Gallagher in the book Murdo's Story, Jack was able to report to the class: We talked about the texture. How the fur would feel soft `cause the artist used lines, short lines sort of on a diagonal. He used hatching on most of the animals. I can see some shadows here on this side `cause the light is coming from over here . . . the moon is the light source. It looks 3D here on those rocks, it looks almost real. In our last interview, when we were viewing Rebirth by Jackson Beardy, I was able to assess the students' grasp of pattern and balance. Rebirth is a very formal symmetrically balanced composition with decorative patterns.
Analysis could also encompass the fourth foundational objective listed in the curriculum guide: to begin to develop skills which will help them, in later years, to depict people and objects accurately (Saskatchewan Learning, 1991a, p. 305). The meaning of “accurately” may be debatable since accuracy could depend on the intention or goal the artist had in mind. Obviously Chagall's floating figures were an accurate depiction of what he had in mind, Monet's impressionistic landscapes accurately represented the effects of light and colour for him. The teachers in Little's (1997) Saskatchewan-based study were also uncomfortable with the wording in this foundational objective, and expressed concern “that the curriculum placed too much emphasis on realism” (Little, p. 61). There is a caution in the guide, where teachers are warned that since “the student may not have accurate depiction as a personal goal for his/her art work” the teacher should only use the activities designed to explore accurate depiction for the purpose of evaluation of this objective (Saskatchewan Education, 1991a, p. 305). The problematic nature of this objective, which focuses on the depiction of objects and people accurately, is evident in Charles' reaction to Picasso's Head of a Weeping Woman with Handkerchief. He was so appreciative of realistic depiction that he was intolerant towards other non-realistic styles of expression. The understanding of the visual concepts of foreground/background, proportion, perspective and point of view, fall within the learning objectives listed as part of the fourth foundational objective, described above. All of these concepts were, at various times, the focus of viewing art activities both in the classroom, and in our student-participant interviews. Most of the students appeared to already have an idea of what parts of a scene were the foreground and background. When discussing the artist's use of perspective the students again drew on their own attempts to depict reality. Jack, in particular, often expressed his understanding of the illusion of three dimensionality: “Well, the artist had to do the background first to make it look 3D . . . and then you do farther up and the foreground so it looks kind of three-dimensional.” When students are trying to figure out how the artist composed the image there is a natural connection to a consideration of why the artist made those choices. While we were talking about how Jackson Beardy organizes the composition, Brandi stated that the “important part” is the shape in the middle, and she thought that “maybe he's trying to tell us something with that”. Even though Brandi did not know, or was not able to articulate, what that “something” might be, she knew it was a significant feature and that Beardy had his reasons for putting it there. This consideration of purpose behind the creation of a work of art relates to the sixth foundational objective which states that students will organize their ideas into visual art expressions, using the processes and materials of art (Saskatchewan Learning, 1991a, p. 306). When students explore ways that artists express ideas by organizing images and elements of art, they may also gain insight into how to create visual images for their own purposes. In the group interview there was a consensus among the four students that Soroseelutu created a “make-believe” or “fantasy” image to possibly show a dream that the artist had had. They also analyzed the composition, pointing out the way the artist had emphasized the man, or hunter, by the placement of the images: he is in the middle, the repeating curved shapes of the sun and the rainbow help to direct attention, as do the birds which are mostly facing towards the middle where the hunter sits, and the overall symmetrical balance of the work. We considered possible reasons Soroseelutu may have had for organizing the scene this way. Brandi thought that Soroseelutu placed the man in the centre because “he probably wanted something to stand out. Like the birds, they would stand out. “Cause they needed something different than the birds -- just like so it's not everything is birds.” Jack pragmatically added that “maybe [the man] is there to fill that up, to fill that space up.” The importance of prior knowledge and experience was evident as the students discussed the style and technique of the Soroseelutu piece:
In the last classroom lesson Sherry Farrell-Racette's poster elicited a comparison of her work with the work of both Picasso and Ted Harrison. A student commented that: “[She] sort of paints like Ted Harrison because he uses bright colours [too]. . . except Ted Harrison doesn't draw the faces, just the outline” then, “[It's] like Picasso the way the heads are turned around”. Interpretation This step in the response process focuses on the viewer's interpretation of the work: what it is “about”. All of the thinking and learning that goes on through the preceding steps contributes to the viewer's construction of meaning. Interpretation is the heart of the transactional process of viewing. “Art works generate different interpretations, and to interpret an artwork is to generate meaning” (Barrett, 1994, p. xiii). The questions about interpretation relate to the confluence of the student's own experiences and perspectives with the visual and contextual evidence of the work. “It is not only unavoidable to draw upon feelings and personal experiences in interpreting art, but such sources are a valid part of criticism” (Stout, 1995, p. 182). Like the first impression, there are no wrong answers when it comes to interpretation, but there can be interpretations that are better reasoned and better grounded in evidence (Barrett, 1994, p. 9). Interpretations may be made public through many forms of expression. In this study, the students expressed their interpretations of the art works orally or by writing in their journals, and sometimes extended their interpretations of works viewed into the creation of their own works of art. Interpretation is a broad, multi-layered category of response. Foundational objectives five and six require students to consider the purposes behind the creation of art by exploring where ideas for visual expression come from, and how those ideas are expressed. We seldom know what the artist's personal intention was for creating a particular piece. Regardless of what the artist's intention was for creating the work, the viewer's interaction with the work includes speculation which may uncover ideas that have a personal association. Each viewer “sees” the work from his/her own personal and cultural perspective. A recognition of common experience with the creative process -- of giving visual form to an idea -- links artist and audience together. In the first interviews with the student participants I asked them why they thought people made art. The range of responses reflected the general nature of the question: “To show other people. . . to sell them maybe and put them in museums”, “for the fun of it ”, “to be famous”, “to make money”, and, “so you can hang a picture on the wall so you can make your house look nice”. These generic views on the reasons for creating art later gave way to ideas related to specific artists and works of art. In response to Pellan's Jeune Comedien, the first work viewed by the four student participants in this study, most of the students thought that the work was made to record something the artist had seen. In their opinion, it was meant to be a visual record of a scene witnessed by the artist. Jack said that “maybe he saw something like that . . . It might have been the first thing that came into his mind that he really -- he really liked the idea”. Charles and Brandi thought that Pellan saw someone that looked like that, “maybe he saw it in a book” and “maybe he went to a party or something”. Morgan did not want to make any guesses at all. (For students who are concerned about knowing the “right” answer, this is a rather unfair question since there is no way they could know for sure how Pellan's idea was generated.) In order to facilitate interpretation through reflection on their emotional response to a work, I asked each student how the work made them feel. Replies such as “[I felt] just normal”, “it feels good” because “it looks real”, “. . . happy” because “he looks like he's having fun” and “pretty good” because “it looks nice” do not tell us much about emotional response. In fact, the limited, superficial response to the question about the effect on their feelings could be indicative of their level of maturity and fluency or may be due to the fact that they had very little contextual information or background knowledge about the subject. In the second interview, the students began to draw deeper and more empathetic meanings from the image of Young Mother Sewing:
Morgan felt that the painting was “about a little girl waiting patiently”. Jack also interpreted the work as being about “waiting” and related how he sometimes had to wait at the table while his Mom finished cooking the dinner. He felt that the mood of the artwork was “calm and quiet”, and that it “sort of makes me feel that way -- kind of tired.” The interpretation step in the viewing process also addresses the eighth foundational objective which is to “become familiar with visual art and artists” (Saskatchewan Learning, 1991a, p. 308). This extremely broad, rather vague objective actually encompasses all of the other objectives. Narrowing the scope of this foundational objective by focusing on learning objectives listed for grade four was helpful. These specific learning objectives are to: “begin to understand that art tells something about the society or community in which it was created” and to “begin to explore the idea that art works evoke responses in viewers” (p. 299). The students demonstrated a tolerance for multiple interpretations of art works. As Brandi replied to the question of whether or not everyone responds to art in the same way: “No, like some people don't really like the portrait and some people like it, some people think it's OK but, like in some ways they don't like it and in some ways they do.” In the third interview, which was a group session, the student participants carefully considered the meaning of the Soroseelutu image. Several times throughout the discussion the students referred to the hunting of animals for food and the importance of the natural environment to the Inuit people.
Since the image was right there to refer to, the students easily supported their interpretations by pointing out the evidence in the work. The more abstract image, Rebirth, by Jackson Beardy, presented a challenge to the individual students in the last interview session. They seemed to have difficulty verbalizing what the image was “about”. Brandi suspected that there was a message in the central shape but she could not explain what it might be. Although both Jack and Charles thought that the image was an expression of the idea of “comforting” their response was more of an intellectual than an emotional response since they were recalling the style and subject of a Clemence Wescoupe print entitled Comforting that their teacher had shown them in class. In her written response to Rebirth, Morgan wrote “It reminds me it is a symbols of hope or dreams (happy dreams)”. Morgan's statement demonstrates that the image evoked response on emotional, associative levels for her. The advantage of classroom discussion is that students get a chance to hear many different ideas and interpretations from other students, as well as share their own. The more articulate students model oral response for the others. Jack thought the meaning of Arcimboldo's work was that the artist “thought that all these things he painted were good things, that nature is good to us.” The discussion continued toward the concept of thanksgiving, which was the class theme for the week. The lesson on viewing masks emphasized the relationship between meaning and function. The students brainstormed a long list of masks and discussed what they were used for. Background information and prior knowledge played a large role in this discussion. When Cheryle asked the students to summarize the various functions of masks the replies included: “to change to someone else”, “to protect your face”, “for the fun of it”, “for decoration” , “to get different feelings”, “like when some cultures worship gods and goddesses”. Cheryle recapped by saying that “masks are used in different cultures for worshipping, for ceremonies, in dances to celebrate different times, or to help sick people -- such as this mask from Alaska worn by a Shaman to help people who are sick. . .” (lesson #5 notes, Oct. 24, 1997). During some lessons the interpretation step was extended into a writing activity. The students wrote a legend to go with a pastel drawing they had done in response to viewing work of the Algonquin Legend Painters. In another lesson they expressed their interpretations by writing a story to go with the poster Keep Your Spirit Free by Sherry Farrell-Racette. Many of the students imagined themselves as the subjects in the painting participating in an adventure. Background Information Step six in the viewing process is a stage where students learn about the context of the work of art from external sources. Up until this point most of the inquiry has involved direct interaction between the work of art and the viewer. The background information step looks at the wider context of the production of the work. Learning about the context of the work of art, and about the artist(s) who created it, is facilitated by the availability of historical and biographical information. This information may come from a variety of sources. Information may come from the students themselves as they draw upon and share related prior knowledge, it may come from video, computer software, and print resources such as art gallery exhibition catalogues and from interviews with artists or other guests invited into the class. “What the students explore at this stage may range from the reading of an artist's statement to embarking on a major research project” (Saskatchewan Learning, 1991a, p. 319). Depending on the grade level of the students, research may be conducted into the historical, religious, social, political and economic factors that affected or contributed to the creation of the work of art. Part of learning about art includes developing a critical awareness of these “other agendas” that drive art (Fehr, 1993, p. 199). Included in this category of background knowledge is an understanding that artistic expression is part of people's lives and that art and artists play important roles in different cultural groups. The development of an awareness of the role of artists within the community could be a product of the viewing process and addresses the seventh curriculum objective: to become aware of the presence of visual art in their own homes, communities and surrounding communities (Saskatchewan Education, 1991a, p. 307). In the first interview each of the four students could recall seeing art in their environment: “lots in the school, and at the health centre,”. . . “at my house on the fridge,”. . . “in the library and at the Motor Inn,”. . . “In P.A. there's a picture on the wall in a store.” Only one student mentioned that she had seen portraits “in museums and stuff.” Their concept of what qualified as art appeared to be quite broad and is informed by their experience with media such as film and television. In the third interview, when the four students met as a group, their recollection of the different art forms and styles they had been introduced to in class rapidly evolved into a lively discussion about the art of computer animated movies.
The students' spontaneous discussions may provide wonderful clues to the kind of art they might be interested in studying further. The broad eighth curriculum objective “to become familiar with visual art and artists” (Saskatchewan Learning, 1991a, p. 308), is also addressed through the background information step in the viewing process. In the first interview only one student could recall an artist they were familiar with, aside from people in their families who “made art”. Jack referred to a class project on Ted Harrison from the previous year. Brandi mentioned that she had “read this one book about an artist” but she could not remember the name of the artist or the title of the book. A month later, in the second interview, Jack, Morgan and Brandi were each able to recall most of the art studied in the class.
The students seemed to delight in being able to identify the artists and their works. This recalling of facts is a “low level” of thinking (Hamblen, 1984, p. 42 ), but it does indicate that the students are building the store of information and vocabulary that may form the reference points for more in-depth analysis later on. Background information becomes background knowledge which enhances analysis. For example, the transference and synthesis of prior knowledge took place when students compared an unfamiliar work by Jackson Beardy with previously viewed art of the Algonquin Legend Painters :
Both Jack and Charles were able to recognize the similarities between the subject matter and style of Jackson Beardy and Clemence Wescoupe. They each thought that both works could have been made by the same artist, which is a reasonable speculation considering the similarities. In the interview sessions there was not enough time to pursue step six in any depth. Usually towards the end of each interview I told each student a little about the artist such as the name, where they were from, when they worked, and the artistic style and/or subjects they used. We read short biographical notes together on Mary Cassatt in the second interview and on Jackson Beardy in the last interview. Often, throughout the course of viewing, clues from the paintings led to historical information. For example, the students picked up on the dress and hairstyles in the portraits as indicators of the date of production. The teacher was able to deal with the background information step more thoroughly in the classroom lessons. Background information was not confined sequentially to step six, and often became relevant to other steps in the process (as also happened in the interview sessions). In the first lesson, the portrait of Daniel Crommelin Verplanck by J.S.Copley demanded discussion of the historical context quite early in the viewing process, during the “description”. Background information became pertinent during the interpretation of Shilling's self-portrait in the next lesson. When discussing the small images of faces in Shilling's painting, one student mused that “they look like masks of souls”. The teacher took this remark as a cue to explain some of the context: “That's interesting, you know, Shilling said that when he paints he is painting the souls of his people. Shilling was an Ojibway artist, a Native from Ontario. He often painted people that were important to him” (lesson #2 notes, Sept. 26, 1997). In another lesson, Cheryle began by reading a story about Picasso to the class in order to give them some background information before viewing the artwork. Picasso (Venezia, 1988) from the `Getting to Know the World's Greatest Artists' series, was a popular book with the students who liked the comic book style and the simple, informative and humorous text. Cheryle read the story aloud and then asked the class questions to review what was learned about Picasso and the various periods and styles of his work. When she asked about the differences between Picasso's painting and the works they had seen by Shilling and Copley the analysis included the following comments: “This is abstract”, “I think Shilling's work also has lots of shapes like circles and some of the colours but this one is more mixed-up”, “Picasso's paintings are a little different, Shilling's colours are hotter” and, “it is more unreal”. While viewing the Woman Weeping with a Handkerchief Cheryle pointed out that “Picasso's style of painting changed over his long lifetime and in the Rose Period and the Blue Period the colours he chose helped to express his feelings” (lesson #3 notes, Oct. 3, 1997). One of the students quipped that the period when Picasso painted the weeping woman must have been his “black period.” In the last unit on narrative art the Algonquin Legend Painters were introduced and the teacher was able to inform the students of some of the cultural and historical context. She told them that: In the 1960's they started to paint the legends that their Elders told them about. Artists like Norval Morrisseau. . . some people didn't like that, but as time went on finally their people started to accept this kind of art. Now this style of art is popular all over Canada, even here in La Ronge (lesson #9 notes, Nov. 28, 1997). There was no real sustained focus on background information, during the ten lessons that comprised this study. In-depth investigation into the historical, religious, social, political or economic contexts of the art and artists did not take place. Step six tended to occur whenever the opportunity arose -- sometimes at the very beginning of the viewing process, sometimes at the very end, and often somewhere in between. It could be the sixth step, but not always. Art history and art criticism were a mutually supportive means of inquiry throughout the viewing process. Informed Judgment The seventh and last step in the viewing process is a culmination or synthesis of the preceding steps. All that was discovered during the transaction with the work of art informs the viewer's opinion about the present value of the work. According to Tom Anderson, the driving question of this synthesis is “what is there about this work that is significant to me, and why?” (1988, p. 35). While this question was not formally asked in the interviews or in the classroom lessons, the students were usually given the opportunity to express their opinion about what they liked about a work, and why. Steering the student towards looking for the positive affects of a work of art is in keeping with one of Terry Barrett's “Principles for Interpreting Art” which says that “responsible interpretations present the artwork in its best rather than its weakest light. . . in the spirit of fair play, generosity of spirit and respect for artists” (Barrett, 1994, p. 8). But this is not to say that the students could not, or did not, express their dislikes as well -- they did -- but the general sense of enjoyment in viewing art was nourished by a positive approach. An assumption in this study is that the curriculum objectives all contribute towards the aim of art education in Saskatchewan, which is “to enable students to understand and value arts expressions throughout life” (Saskatchewan Learning, 1991a, p. 5). The “informed judgment” step in the viewing process can be considered as evidence of the value and understanding a student has of a particular work of art. Rather than addressing any particular foundational objectives, this culminating step in the viewing process, in a sense, refers to all of the objectives. The level or quality of judgment depends upon the level of achievement of all of the objectives. Michael Parsons' (1987) research into how children judge art is helpful in the analysis of this last step in the viewing process. In Parsons' cognitive developmental account of aesthetic experience he defines five stages of increasingly sophisticated levels of understanding art. Each stage is a “loosely knit structure in which a number of ideas are shaped by a dominant insight into art” (Parsons, p. 20). Parsons describes each of the five stages in terms of aesthetic and psychological character-istics. Young children in “stage one” have a “freewheeling associative response to subject matter. . . and have a happy acceptance of whatever comes to mind” (p. 22). In “stage two” the subject is the dominant idea and the viewer believes that the basic purpose of painting is to represent an attractive subject in a realistic style that demonstrates skill and care (p. 22). In “stage three” the beauty of the subject matter becomes secondary to what is expressed (p. 23). The criteria the students used for their evaluations of works of art in this study place them mainly within the Parsons' second stage -- with glimpses of the first and third stages showing through occasionally. For example, many times throughout the interview sessions the four students in the study group expressed admiration for the artists' skills or technical abilities. The skill, patience and care taken by an artist made the work “good”. In the first interview Brandi explained that you could tell by looking at a work of art “if they did good, if they need to work harder”. Jack thought that Jackson Beardy's ability to draw a circle was remarkable:
Another criteria that falls within Parsons' second stage of understanding, and which was important to the students, was realism. Jack was impressed by Alfred Pellan's ability to make the figure in the portrait “look 3D”, and the way he painted the hat, the pipe in the man's hand, and the “wrinkles on the shirt”. Charles demonstrated that he also preferred realism in art when he responded to Pellan's Jeune Comedien:
Consistent with Charles' approval of realistic images is his disapproval of art that does not meet his criterion of realism. This stance was forcefully presented in his response to Picasso's Weeping Woman with a Handkerchief. Charles' body language, off-hand comments and written response clearly showed his disgust: “He was all gibild snote was coming out of his nous. she had a yellow shial on and a pink shirt gross (?) and long hare. This pirson is reel reel ugly and stopid . . .” When I wrote back to him I asked what “gibild” meant and he replied: “It meens that the nows is in a difirint plase and mowth is someware elts.” In answer to the question of what he thought about Cubism, Charles' reply is confusing: “I hate his style wasent(?) relhistit and fun and gibild. I thing his style is good. My afirnoon was rily funy and the picter was good. . . I think his art is stoopid and ugly and dome.” A possible explanation of Charles' contradictory statement could be that he thought that to say the picture was good was the “right” answer or, alternatively, he is beginning to understand the difference between liking something and thinking it is good (Parsons, 1987, p. 126). After listening to the more favourable and sympathetic responses of his classmates about why the woman might be weeping, Charles may have decided that even though he does not like the unrealistic style the painting could still be considered “good” due to another criteria, such as the importance of the “message”. There were not enough data to determine if this actually was a case “where liking and judging run in opposite direction” (Parsons p. 126). But, since Charles could not resist that last swipe at Picasso, and because the tiny note of approval is so inconsistent with the rest of his response, I suspect that it is there for another reason -- such as to conform (temporarily) and/or to please the teacher. The students definitely approved of Giuseppe Arcimboldo's clever, realistic work. The rapt attention shown when the prints of The Four Seasons were displayed indicated that the whole class found his work fascinating and “really cool”. In an interview following the lesson on Arcimboldo we reviewed some of the art viewed in class and Brandi's response was indicative of the approval level and the curiosity about how Arcimboldo created his paintings:
The teacher brought up the question of whether or not art has to be realistic. There was a short discussion about the levels of realism in the works of art they had studied so far. Some students also put their thoughts down in their journals. Jack wrote: “I think the stile cubism looks cool. I think art dose not have to look like the real thing because it depends on who is painting the picture.” When beauty, realism and skill are “objective grounds for judgments”, Parsons labels those responses as stage two (p. 22). The most characteristic judgments of stage two are confident ones where it becomes obvious that a painting is pretty or realistic. The reverse is also characteristic where it is obvious that something is poor because it is ugly or sloppily done. (Parsons, 1987, p. 126) Stage one on the other hand is when judgment is based on favouritism. “A favourite colour is one that always brings pleasure, and for that reason a painting is better if it contains that colour” (Parsons, p. 29). Brandi and Morgan frequently mentioned favourite colours. Brandi said she liked Rebirth by Jackson Beardy because “that shape looks really neat and I like bright colours that he used, especially the burgundy, that's my favourite colour”. These fourth grade students are in transition between stages one (“I like it so it must be good”) and two (“it's good because it looks real and is well made”), as defined by Parsons. In the whole class viewing activities there was little opportunity for the expression of individual judgments about a work. The whole group discussion was a time to explore the work and share responses. Usually this last step in the viewing process was dealt with when the students wrote entries in their art response journals at the end of the lesson. Cheryle often wrote questions on the blackboard to guide their written response. In this way she was able to ask not only about their opinion of the work but also the reasons why they felt that way. After viewing some prints of Arcimboldo's Four Seasons, Brandi wrote “I think fantasy art is apsolutly beautiful because it has nice coulors and tekneekes.” At the end of another lesson, Jack wrote “I like the picture `Golden Eagle' by Ben Thomas because I like pictures of sculptars, I think it looks like an eagle and you can see the textures.” After viewing a slide of Maxine Noel's Sacred Circle, Morgan wrote in her journal “I like this pichure because the way she made the woman in the circle. I like the feathers because there sparkles on them. I like the color bule and white . . . It makes me feels cool and nice.” At the end of the mask-making unit all of the students' masks were put on display in the hallway and they took turns volunteering to talk about their mask and answer questions from the class. There was great interest and enthusiasm shown by the presenters and the audience. Questions were asked about the process of creating the masks, such as where the idea came from, what problems were encountered and solved. Students were also encouraged to tell what they liked about the presenter's mask. As a follow-up to the peer mask viewing activity Cheryle asked the students to brainstorm criteria for judging masks. On a chart under the heading “What Makes a Good Mask?” the students came up with the following list of criteria:
After a review of the criteria to ensure consensus, the students voted on each mask. For this part of the activity the teacher encouraged the students to be respectful and to look for the ways the mask makers had achieved the criteria -- to look for the “good points” in all the masks. Even though this was supposed to be a “secret” ballot there was a great deal of discussion about the masks as small clusters of students stood in front of the display, or huddled in corners and even sat under a table. The teacher and I wandered around, asking questions. The students seemed focused on the task and I witnessed persuasive debate as students explained the reasons for their choices to their friends. One student earnestly pointed out the imaginative use of found objects (“weird stuff”) used for decoration, someone else mentioned how the horns sticking out on a mask made it seem scary, another student preferred the humour in a mask with “crooked eyeballs”. They spent a quarter of an hour engaged in art criticism, including judgment based on formal criteria. Proportionally there was not as much time spent on “informed judgment”, the last step in the viewing process, as there was time spent on the other steps in the process. Cheryle and I felt that the students needed more time to look than to judge -- that they had “not had enough experience” (meeting notes, Oct. 10, 1997) with the process of viewing art to be able to makeinformed judgments. As Rita Irwin states, “postponing the act of judging affords the student opportunities to develop language skills, to build vocabulary, to reason deductively and inductively, and to learn the grammar and logic found within visual forms” (Irwin, 1989, p. 21). Summary This section has provided a glimpse into the viewing process “in action” in a classroom of grade four students as well as in the more controlled interview sessions with four students from the class. The various activities that took place within the structure of the seven-step viewing process provided learning opportunities that supported the development of the students' knowledge, skills and abilities to construct meaning and respond to art. The students' transactions with the works of art, which included perceiving, interpreting and judging, was expressed through their talking and writing about art and through their own art-making. Growth in the students' abilities to access art became evident through the analysis of the data which revealed that the curriculum objectives were addressed, and met, through the viewing process. The data analysis also revealed that the implemented model generates an unpredictable and recursive inquiry process that can yield surprising discoveries. Examples of student responses were selected from the wide range of collected data to describe and explain the steps in the viewing process, and to identify and verify the themes that emerged from the data. These themes will be discussed in the next section. Part Two: Four Emerging Themes -- The Students' Experience Four main themes emerged from the data that relate directly to students' access to art. Each theme encompasses a set of related factors that affect the quality of the viewing experience and the depth of response. The first theme,Time Allocation, is an overarching theme that impacts on all the themes relating to the students' experience with the viewing process. Adequate allocation of time, including sensitive sequencing, timing and pacing of activities, was necessary in order for students to explore a work of art. This exploration was achieved when there was time for the recursive process of looking, thinking, talking, writing, sharing and reflecting. Time was a crucial factor in the second theme which is Personal Connections. Opportunities for the viewer to make connections between the work of art viewed and his or her personal experience and knowledge enhanced viewer response. The third theme is Social Interaction. The viewing process is a creative meaning-making endeavour that flows beyond individual response to include anyone who has something to contribute to the dialogue about the work of art. The fourth theme is “instructional flexibility”. The reality of student response and interaction demanded a flexible application of the viewing process instructional model. All four themes are interdependent. The factors affecting student access to art did not appear in isolation. Individuals needed time and opportunity to make personal associations before sharing could start. The unpredictability of those personal associations, and the resulting discussion when personal thoughts and feelings were shared, was accommodated by the flexible structure of the viewing process. Acknowledging this interdependence, each of the themes will be discussed separately on the following pages. Time Allocation It became evident throughout the course of the study that students should not be rushed when they are viewing art. Students need adequate time to look carefully and see clearly. Timing of questioning and pacing of activities is a factor in how and what students learn from viewing art. Time considerations were very much a part of the organization and planning of the lessons. The viewing process is not a single activity, but, it is a structure within which many different kinds of activities can occur in a process of discovery. “Looking at art requires thinking -- art must be “thought through” (Perkins, 1994, p. 3). Students need time to respond to art: to perceive, to think about what it is they are seeing, to share their perceptions with others, to look again, to change or revise their ideas, to look again and so on. The “looking-thinking-telling” is a recursive process. An incident in the very first interview with Brandi illustrates how much meaning-making depends upon the provision of adequate time to think and reflect. Brandi initially said that the man in Pellan's portrait Jeune Comedien made her feel “happy” (he is wearing a “funny” hat and is holding a mask). But, towards the end of the interview she had changed her mind and thought the man was “scary”, and was able to say why. Time was taken for her to look more carefully and revise her interpretation from a superficial idea to a more thoughtful and meaningful one. In the whole class viewing activities time was allocated for students to contribute and reflect on ideas. When someone made a statement about what they saw or understood about the work of art being examined, the other students looked at the work to confirm or reject the statement for themselves. Some students even felt compelled to get up out of their seats to go up to the image for a closer look. Many of the students in the class as well as the four students in the study group occasionally needed extra time to identify images in the paintings. Sometimes all the colours, shapes, lines and textures depicting a three-dimensional image in a two-dimensional form, were difficult to decipher. The students needed time to look for recognizable images to help them make sense of it all. To encourage higher levels of thinking and response and deeper reflection, adequate “discovery” time is needed to explore the image. Cheryle structured time for individual reflection by allowing time for students to write in their art response journals. Displaying prints around the classroom of the artwork that has been viewed during the lessons may also facilitate informal reflection. In the last interview Jack explained why time to respond is important:
Once the students had sorted out the image and had begun to analyze and interpret it, they needed time to explain the logic behind their interpretations: why they thought Daniel Crommelin Verplanck was a “rich kid”, why the hat looks “3D”, why Cassatt painted the background that way, or why Arcimboldo painted vegetables. The thinking that happens when students explore art is made public when they get a chance to explain their reasoning. This benefits the person sharing their idea as well as the people listening. Proportionally little time was allocated for exchange and sharing of written response. The students only shared their written responses with each other a few times -- either reading aloud from their journals to the whole class, or switching their journals with partners to write comments on the written responses. Every week I responded in writing to the journal entries of the four students in the study group while the teacher responded in writing to the journal entries of the other students. We made comments and asked questions but a real written “dialogue” about the art never developed. Opportunities to Make Connections In every step in the viewing process there were responses from the students that referred directly to their personal life experience. Connections to their family and friends, their experience with art and art materials, their experience in school, all found their way into the students' responses to art. Meaning was constructed when a new experience was connected with what is known. Again, there must be time and opportunity allowed where personal associations, thoughts and feelings may be revealed. These personal associations were not always obvious; sometimes they had to be retrieved and prodded into consciousness. When the students were allowed to diverge, and go off on tangents, personal ties to the artwork were established. Of course the teacher judged when to rein-in the discussion and draw attention back to the image at hand. But sometimes resisting the urge to gain control and, instead, letting the students pursue some free association and musing yielded interesting results. In the group discussion in the third interview there were several instances of students discovering personal connections to the artwork. The talk about animated movies and the properties of rainbows, the debate about the habits of birds, and the anecdotes about dreams, all related closely to the Soroseelutu print. The entire discussion around the print went on for almost an hour and I had to end it because the period was over. In the interviews with the individual students constant connections to their personal lives were made. Young Mother Sewing by Mary Cassatt really seemed to touch a cord about relationships with mothers, and have personal significance for most of the students. Jack could empathize with the little girl in the picture. He told me about what it was like at dinnertime at his house, and how he was familiar with the notion of “waiting patiently” for his mom. Brandi related a long convoluted story about going to a friend's house for a sleep-over, but the point of the story was that the pleasant memory of her friend leaning on her mother's lap was very similar to the image in the Cassatt painting. The painting mirrored a memory for Brandi. Of course, in the classroom, where there were over twenty students, probably almost all with personal stories to tell, Cheryle had to exercise diplomacy and patience to allow for fair opportunity for expression, but also steer the discussion back on track if necessary. The journals provided a location for the expression of emotional and associative response. Once in a while, deep and empathetic thinking appeared. After viewing the Portrait of a Girl by Arthur Shilling, Morgan wrote “She must be thinking of her father died, or maybe her father moved somewhere far”. Or, alternatively, the journal reader may even be treated to a bit of philosophy such as when Brandi wrote: “The thing about Arcimboldo is his painting of food and outdoors. He said `life's short you gotta get out of bed and look what's around you!' “ An activity that was designed to encourage empathetic response was the “interview” of the weeping woman in the Picasso print during the third lesson. The teacher had explained that Picasso expressed his feelings about war through his art. After a brief discussion about why the woman might be crying, the students were asked to make up a list of three questions they would like to ask the woman in the painting, and then to answer the questions themselves “like role playing” (lesson #3 notes Oct. 3, 1997). The students wrote quietly, occasionally conferring with a neighbour. Although Jack's time-line was a little askew, he wrote: “Why are you unhappy?” “I am sad because my dad died.” “Where did you get that handkerchef?” “I got it from my dad in 1968.” “You had it all that time?” “Yes” . Morgan and Brandi both wrote that the woman was crying because her son was killed in a war. This activity may have been developed further if there had been more time and if the teacher had felt comfortable with the students actually playing the roles of the weeping woman and a reporter. Over the course of the study the students increasingly made reference to art and artists. There was little mention of artists at the beginning of the study, except for family members who they considered to be artists. Jack recollected “doing a Ted Harrison” painting in class the year before. As the students were exposed to more and more artists, they started to make their own connections between the artists and the artists' work. They discovered similarities and differences between style, technique, and subject matter. Comparisons were drawn among the works of Shilling, Picasso, Arcimboldo, Iroquois mask carvers, and Sherry Farrell-Racette. The students drew their own connections with their art knowledge accumulated over the ten-week study. The intense focus on art knowledge, my presence in the class, and the students' perception of the purpose of the research study, may have encouraged, or inspired, the students to express their understanding of art and artists. The teacher, Cheryle, planned for connections between the art viewed and the thematic unit the class was working on. Units were planned by the teacher to integrate several areas of study under one “theme”. For example, the first theme about identity integrated English Language Arts, Social Studies, Health, and Arts Education. The thematic unit topics were a main criteria for the selection of images, such as the paintings by Arcimboldo which connected with the Thanksgiving theme. The students' experience with literature was reflected in their responses to art. The idea that the artist was sending a message to the viewer became more apparent after the students began to study legends in their language arts lessons. The responses took on a distinct moralizing tone when narrative art was viewed in conjunction with the focus on legends. An example of the influence of literature experience occurred in the third interview, when a couple of the students shared with the group what they thought the picture was about. They concluded that “you should be thankful that, like, you're not greedy and stuff, `cause some people are looking for the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow” and, “Birds. Treat birds with care.” Viewing works of art sparked many remarks and discussions on related topics. In the group session, (the third interview), the students shared prior knowledge of science topics such as weather, seasons, rainbows and birds. Works of art used in this study proved to be useful starting points for discussion related to many areas of study (especially language arts, social studies, and science), although there was not enough time during the art lessons to pursue those related lines of inquiry in depth. Also, data were not collected on whether connections were explicitly made to art during instruction in the other areas of study. Connections to students' experience with art materials, the techniques of art production and the creative process, were also made during the viewing activities. Insight into how works are created enhances appreciation. These connections were starting points for construction of meaning -- a means of gaining entry into the artwork. Social Interaction Art criticism is a social activity. It is a creative process that needs an audience. The students in this study enjoyed sharing their ideas, interpretations and opinions with others. The data in this study support the idea of the social nature of learning that Vygotsky and others have presented (Straw, 1990). The most successful interview in terms of the quality of the responses -- the breadth and depth of the emotional, associative and intellectual response -- was the third interview, which was the group interview. I was pleased with the creative thinking and the generous, good-natured willingness to speculate, offer and explore ideas. After three months of the school year the students were comfortable enough with each other -- and with me -- to share their feelings and ideas. The discussion went off on a few tangents but the image was the anchor; it held our attention for a long time. Of course, the two more talkative students tended to dominate the conversation but I tried to draw the shyer students in by asking them for their ideas or asking if they had anything to add when someone else made a point, and keeping eye contact with them. All four students did contribute; in fact it was the quietest child, Morgan, who made the important observation about the materials that the artist used (markers). While a group of four students, may be an excellent group size for viewing art, it was of course not the normal situation in the classroom. There were usually twenty students in the class during each art lesson. Nevertheless, there were interesting exchanges and satisfying discussions during the whole class lessons once the required elements of trust and respect were established. Comfort and familiarity with the viewing process fostered the sharing of ideas. The activities where students had the opportunity to work with a partner or “buddy” generated some intense discussion among pairs of students. For example, in the eighth lesson, after reading the legend Murdo's Story to the class, the teacher directed the pairs to look at a print of one of Terry Gallagher's illustrations and find out how the artist used elements of art in the black and white prints. They were to look for the use of line, texture, value and space, then discuss it together and record what they found out. Spread out around the room, each pair of students peered carefully at their print. Cheryle circulated throughout the classroom asking and answering questions, and listening to the discussions. After about ten minutes the partners took turns at the front of the room to report on what they had discovered. The oral reports demonstrated that the students had remained on task and had thought carefully about the image. Fluency in the language of art is necessary before students can engage fully in art criticism. They learn this language from participating in viewing art activities with their peers and their teacher. Both the teacher and students in this study modelled the use of appropriate vocabulary. Learning about and through art was enhanced in the experiential context of the classroom where exploring art was an interesting and enjoyable social activity. It is in the classroom where they heard a wide range of responses which included formal analysis, personal feelings and associations, and art historical information. Both the teacher and the students were feeling more comfortable with the viewing process by the end of the study. The class discussions were more animated, democratic and less teacher-dominated. It is not possible in this short-term study to accurately measure the direct impact of this peer influence, but there did appear to be a real increase in the use of art terminology and descriptive language. Many of the students demonstrated their understanding of terms and knowledge of artists, styles, subject matter, technique and medium. It is crucial that students develop a descriptive vocabulary in order to articulate what they observe in the work. One day I arrived in class and a little girl rushed up to me all excited about a book on Picasso she had found in the library. With her friends crowded around her, she proceeded to show me the plates -- she knew the book cover to cover -- and explained why she preferred the Rose Period to the Blue Period. The thrill over art was contagious! Instructional Flexibility The data show that the viewing process model described in the Saskatchewan curriculum guide must be implemented in a flexible, responsive manner. It is presented in a strict linear form in the guide but that does not mean that it should be employed in that way. The reality of student interaction with various works of art demonstrates the need for flexibility. Deviation from the linear model was manifested in the variable step sequence, and overlapping or “blending” of the steps. The steps in the viewing process often did not occur in a predictable sequence but, rather, they overlapped in various configurations depending on the work viewed and the needs, interests and abilities of the viewers themselves. The sequence of steps varied from one viewing session to the next. There was more emphasis on the description, analysis, and interpretation than on the other steps and the background information step could easily have taken more time if it was available. Another aspect about the viewing process that arose was that the steps themselves blended together. The idea of completely finishing with one step before going on to the next step was an unrealistic idea that was discarded early on in the study. For example, the first impression step was usually the beginning of the description step. The extent and form of the initial reaction depended on the work being viewed. Sometimes there was no strong “reaction”, just an identification of various elements, and at other times there was a strong first impression (such as with the Picasso print). The students' lack of experience in viewing art may have contributed to the dearth of reaction -- they really did not know what to say or how to express an impression. It was necessary to allow the opportunity for the expression of a first impression but not necessary to dwell on it for long. The description provided the framework for response in the other steps. Again, time was a factor. It was this step where we really tried to slow down, look carefully, and notice details. Description and analysis often blended together in the same observation. Description became more than just taking inventory when the students explained how the artist achieved a certain effect: “making that hat look really 3D getting all that shade and stuff.” A description of the materials the artist used led naturally to an examination of how the artist used those materials -- an analysis of technique. For example, it was noted that Arthur Shilling dabbed on bright thick paint in an energetic, expressive manner (the student demonstrated the painter's gesture to get across his idea -- the terminology was then supplied). Pointing out the basic triangular shape Cassatt used in her painting Young Mother Sewing led to an analysis of balance and emphasis. Description flowed seamlessly into analysis. Analysis and interpretation also tended to merge. Examination of how an artist achieved certain effects led to a consideration of why those effects were important and how they contributed to the meaning. For example, observations of Soroseelutu's use of an indefinite watercolour background and placement of the birds and rainbow in relation to the man led to speculation on the significance of those choices and the overall meaning or message of the work. Background information was often relevant to description and interpretation. The description of the appearance of the figure in a portrait led to a sharing of ideas about the possible time, place, identity, and, even the feelings and character of the model and provided connecting points among description, background information, and interpretation. Opportunities to delve into the historical context of a work of art arose throughout the viewing process but time constraints limited the amount of exploration into background information. The use of reference books on the artists helped to fill gaps in the students' background knowledge. Informed judgment is a culmination of all of the foregoing steps. Parsons (1987, p. 22) notes that people in “stage two” tend to arrive at an early judgment based on the subject of the work of art. This tendency towards early judgment did appear, but there was also evidence of students changing their minds about the works. Since judgment may be continuously revised throughout the viewing process it is important that students get the chance to hear the opinions and ideas of others, have time to reflect on their own opinions, and feel free to change their minds about a work when there is sufficient evidence to support their opinions. Summary The four themes uncovered by this study which are related to the students' experiences as they attempted to access art were: time allocation, personal connections, social interaction, and instructional flexibility. The data revealed that student access to art was affected by the amount of time and opportunity allocated for response. Response on the emotional, associative and intellectual levels formed the personal connections between the viewer and the work of art. Access to art through the formation of personal connections was enhanced by social interaction with other viewers. Response was rarely linear or predictable. In order to accommodate and support all of these factors that affect access to art it was necessary for the viewing process instructional model to be implemented in a recursive, flexible form. Part Three: Four Emerging Themes --The Teacher's Experience One of the objectives of this research project was to document the experiences of a teacher as she attempted to implement the viewing process instructional model in her grade four classroom. The two main purposes of this objective were to find out if this model “works” from a teacher's point of view, and to find out if it is feasible to expect a generalist elementary teacher to use this model as part of an arts education program. Factors that affected the teacher's experience and issues and concerns related to implementation were identified upon analysis of a variety of data: notes from meetings, interview questionnaires, field notes from lesson observations and the teacher's personal journal. In this study, the main factors affecting the implementation of the viewing process model specific to the experience of the teacher were: the teacher's attitude, prior training and experience in art; available support (including resources such as materials, other people, and time); and her ability to assess and reflect on her teaching. These three factors are inter-related. For example, time is needed in order to supplement training by taking advantage of professional development opportunities or to identify and locate potential resource support. A fourth factor affecting the experience of the teacher was her involvement in the research study. The notion of whether or not a particular instructional model or strategy “works” is based on several criteria. Cheryle and I agreed that certain characteristics have to be present for the model to be deemed successful. There has to be sufficient evidence of student learning and growth through realization of objectives, and a sense of their interest and joy in the learning activities. The teacher should also be interested, even challenged, but feel comfortable and confident in her abilities to implement the instructional model. There must be freedom to adapt the model to suit the learning situation and the needs of both teacher and students. In summary, an instructional model that “works” is one where the benefits for the teacher and students outweigh, or at least balance, the risks and investment of time and energy. We also concurred that success depends on the skills and abilities of whoever is involved (including teacher and students), and the kinds of support available to them. Attitude and Experience Cheryle is a calm, thoughtful and perceptive person, a good listener and a caring professional. She attended each of the four Arts Education curriculum implementation inservices conducted in the school division during 1991-1992 (one day for each strand -- dance, drama, music and visual art). Visual art has always had a place on her weekly class timetable. At our initial interview Cheryle said she felt “pretty comfortable” about teaching art, “as long as I'm enjoying it -- the theme or topic” (interview Sept. 5, 1997, p.3). Cheryle admitted that her attitude towards teaching art is influenced by her own happy experience with art as a student in school. She acknowledged that she “enjoyed art throughout school” and recollected the special time when she received an art award in high school. After finishing public school in Prince Albert, Cheryle went on to S.U.N.T.E.P. (Saskatchewan Urban Native Teacher Education Program) and the University of Saskatchewan where she took Art Education classes as well as “a couple of Native Art classes” (interview Sept. 5, 1997, p.2). She said she “feels pretty good” about her own abilities to respond to art. “I enjoy going to galleries and looking at art. The critique experience in my courses helped” (p.3). Cheryle also engages in artistic pursuits in her personal life such as decorating, painting, calligraphy and crafts. The teacher's attitude towards teaching art is inextricably linked to her prior experience with art education. Cheryle drew on her own personal experience when, in the first interview, she was asked whether or not art education should be a required subject and part of provincial core curriculum: Yes, from my own experience art has been so valuable and encouraging -- it's helped my own self-esteem. I'd like to give students part of that. Art gives students who may not be great in other subjects a chance for success. It's really important, and the students really enjoy it. Student response to all of the arts has been really positive (interview, Sept. 5, 1997, p.3). While she sees the value of education in all four strands of the Arts Education curriculum, Cheryle stated that she enjoyed teaching drama, dance and music more than visual arts. Since there is a large staff at this particular school, with a few classes at each grade level, teachers are able to accommodate their strengths by switching classes. “Sometimes I offer to trade to do another teacher's dance or music if they'll do my art or something” (interview, Sept. 5, 1997, p.3). Cheryle began the study with a positive attitude towards teaching art and implementing the viewing process in the classroom, and this was reinforced and nourished by the responses of the students. Student response was a reward for her effort and the stress and uncertainty that goes along with trying something new, and gave her the incentive and confidence to continue with the implementation. The student responses proved to be quite surprising at times. Cheryle wrote in her journal after the first lesson: “Student responses -- oral and written -- were quite interesting. New insights I have not thought about -- all was new to me” (journal entry, Sept. 19, 1997, p.2). Viewing art in the classroom was a discovery process for both teacher and students. After the lesson spent viewing the Picasso print, Cheryle wrote: I enjoyed reading their initial responses; interviews with the `weeping woman' and their thoughts and feelings about Picasso and his art. I was really surprised -- almost shocked -- to hear several of them thought this was a funny picture. I had not thought about it in that way. I let the students know this on Monday. They said the more they looked at the painting, the sadder it became (journal entry, Oct. 3, 1997, p.8). Cheryle's grade four class had a wide range of academic and behavioural levels. At the beginning of the study Cheryle expressed her doubts about how the students would perform. A few will remain unfocused, fidgety throughout the ten lessons. Others I'm not sure -- just not sure what they think is going on. To me that's annoying. These distractions make me distracted because I believe this is an important part of their education (journal entry, Sept. 19, 1997, p.1). But, by the fourth lesson she could see that the art, and her instruction, was holding their attention and she wrote: “All in all I found the entire lesson to be a success. Students listened well and worked hard to do a good job” (journal entry, Oct. 10, 1997, p.11). The students' evident growth in understanding and artistic vocabulary was also noted. “They realized that Arcimboldo's style was still realistic but learned that fantasy played a large part in his paintings . . . . I was impressed with the way they figured a certain print was a certain style” (p. 10). During the process of inquiry into art, when the students and teacher shared their responses, the role of teacher and learner was shared. Sometimes the students took turns, with pointer in hand, to come up to the screen and explain certain features on the slide image, or read aloud from their response journals. Towards the end of November Cheryle was feeling very positive about the experience and wrote “The afternoon went better than I had anticipated. Students were focused and enthused. Again, they came up with ideas I had not thought about” (journal entry, Nov. 28, p. 24). Supports Several types of resources are included in this category. Instructional resource materials, resource people, and administrative support are the building blocks for implementation of an instructional model. The “mortar” is time. Time is a valuable resource that supports learning for both the teacher and the students. Cheryle cites the task of getting the materials in time as a major challenge she faces in teaching art: You have to really plan ahead. If you don't know what materials you'll need -- if you don't know what you'll be doing in the next school year then the supplies won't be ordered and you won't have them when you need them. Things are ordered over the summer and if you don't get what you need for the next year then you're really limited. If you want it there when you need it you have to plan way ahead (interview, Sept. 5, 1997, p. 1). This poses a particular problem for first year teachers who are left with what was ordered for them by the outgoing teacher. It is especially crucial for teachers in the north to plan ahead since most art resources are not available locally and “it's not always possible to get to P.A. or Saskatoon either” (interview, Sept. 5, p. 1). The task of ordering resource materials was expedited at the school by an arts education committee. Four teachers, including Cheryle, sat on the committee. These teachers met together to research and locate sources of appropriate resources, made decisions about selection, brought their recommendations to the staff to get a general consensus, and then organized the ordering of the materials to ensure that no teachers had to begin the next year without arts resources. The school library had an adequate supply of visual art resources, including several Art Image print kits and all of the slide kits produced by Saskatchewan Learning. There was also an excellent selection of high-quality illustrated storybooks and reference books. The library staff provides support by helping teachers to locate relevant materials as well as by ordering and maintaining the library collection of arts resources and audio-visual equipment. A wide range of resources are necessary to support the implementation of the viewing process. Good quality reproductions are necessary for the response activities. Cheryle found that “anything concrete” was useful: “slides, prints, posters, your own teacher samples . . . books and stories, student work -- their writings and pictures” (interview, Dec. 18, 1997, p. 1). She felt that all of these resources, with the addition of videos, should be available to teachers in order to implement the viewing process successfully in the classroom. At first Cheryle was a little frustrated with trying to use the slides. Even though she agreed that slides probably gave the best image, the use of the slide projector presented some problems. When we found a projector that worked (with a quiet fan), the carousel had to be readied, the extension cord located, the equipment set up in the classroom, and large sheets of black paper taped up over the ample windows during lunch hour. After all the preparations, we discovered during the lesson that it was so dark in the room that Cheryle could hardly see the students raising their hands to respond, not to mention the tricky manoeuvring in a crowded classroom. By the second lesson adjustments were made and Cheryle began to feel more comfortable using the slides. She thought it was a good idea to intersperse a variety of resources throughout the unit, using slides for some lessons and using large prints or illustrated books for others, so that the students would not get tired of one type of image. Another form of support provided to teachers in this school division comes from the central office education consultants. Since I was both the researcher and the K-12 Arts Education consultant, this study provided the opportunity for me to work closely with one teacher consistently over a period of four months, rather than the usual “scattered” approach that this far-flung school division imposes. Cheryle had never considered requesting consultant services before and she admitted to initially feeling both excited and intimidated at the prospect of working closely with a consultant. At first she was uncertain of expectations and, for several weeks in September and October, her anxiety level increased on Thursdays, the day before our weekly planning meeting. In November she wrote in her journal: Planning session went well. . . it is really convenient having Debby around guiding me through the lessons. Without her weekly input, feedback and ideas, not to mention help with extra preparation details I wonder how creative I would be. . . . I find, and believe, planning with someone who knows about the Arts Education strands is an ideal way to do this. I find my perspective opens up when working with Debby (journal entry, Nov. 28, 1997, p. 23). Cheryle and I definitely became more relaxed and comfortable with each other. She commented in her journal that “[Debby's] insights and advice and direction were valuable to me and I feel I have a much better, more accurate understanding of the visual art strand” (journal entry, Dec. 5, 1997, p. 27). At the end of the study Cheryle's suggestion to teachers about working with a consultant was to “Try it. You will gain much in terms of new insights, information and knowledge and ways to go about implementing new curriculum -- as well as excellent resource materials” (interview, Dec.18, 1997, p. 6). Not all teachers have access to consultant support, or if they do the chances of meeting with the same consultant once a week for several consecutive weeks may be remote. Availability of such support -- of coaching, guidance and “gentle” pressure -- affects the implementation experience of the teacher. As a participant-researcher I participated as an Arts Education consultant, and, therefore, had an obvious opportunity to influence the process of implementing the instructional model. Indeed, part of the teacher's anxiety may have been related to the fact that I was not entirely an “outsider” but had come from “main office”. By the end of the study Cheryle was feeling confident and comfortable using the viewing process as an instructional model in her classroom “. . . more so now than in September. It feels more natural to discuss aspects of a piece of art. I will continue to do so in the future” (interview, Dec. 18, 1997, p.2). But, she emphasizes that administrators who evaluate teachers “need to remember that time is very important, as well as patience with teachers implementing the strands” (interview, Dec. 18, p. 2). Administrators, both principals and superintendents, support teachers when they provide time and encouragement teachers need as they explore and try new ideas from the curriculum. In this study the teacher spent four months on the viewing process and related key instructional strategies. Each of the components of the arts education curriculum --cultural/historical, critical/responsive, and creative/productive -- was integrated into the viewing process lessons. Even though it may at first appear as if we were focusing on one small part of the curriculum, all of the objectives were, in fact, addressed through the range of planned activities. In our last interview I asked Cheryle if she thought it was reasonable to expect generalist elementary teachers to be able to use the viewing process as part of their visual art program. She replied: “Absolutely. It must be remembered that establishing these steps takes time instead of all at once. Some days go through all of the steps and other days only a few” (interview, Dec. 18, p. 1). Cheryle's satisfaction with her experience implementing the viewing process does not coincide with her feelings about the Arts Education curriculum in general. The curriculum implementation inservice schedule allowed little time for the teachers to read the guide, try out the suggested strategies, and reflect on the curriculum changes. There was “too much too fast” (interview, Sept. 5, 1997, p. 4). This complaint has been expressed by many teachers and has been documented in the research (Arnott, 1994. p. 54). In our division we had four inservice days -- one for each strand -- spread over two years, but there is still the perception that there “wasn't enough time to really get into it” (interview, Sept. 5, p. 4). Before the classroom phase of the study began, at our initial interview, Cheryle thought that generalist teachers should “probably not” be expected to teach from the provincial curriculum. It's a lot to expect of teachers. It is really new to a lot of teachers. It's especially tough on older teachers who didn't have art [in their training]. There should have been more time to experiment with one strand at a time, to sort of ease into it. All four strands at once is a lot, and it's a lot to expect teachers to implement it all (interview, Sept. 5, p. 3). Halfway through the study, at the end of October, Cheryle was still fairly skeptical about the idea of implementing the whole curriculum: It will take a long time before the regular classroom teacher masters the implementation of all four strands of Arts Education. That is what I believe. It will take me several more years before I feel really comfortable with doing all that is expected of me or that is outlined in the Arts Education Curriculum (journal entry, Oct. 30, 1997, p. 18). This statement is from a teacher who has had some training and experience in art and who has an enthusiastic and positive attitude towards teaching art. A teacher without a positive experience and attitude towards the arts and the prospect of teaching a four-strand curriculum may well feel quite pessimistic about the whole endeavour. Time, or time management, was very much an issue for Cheryle as she attempted to implement the viewing process. Teachers are very busy people, and implementing new curricula only adds to an already heavy load (Desrosier, 1996, p. 89). Cheryle was faced with the challenges of finding time to plan the lesson and organize the materials, determining allotted time for each component of the lesson, monitoring the pacing, and choosing time to reflect. During the time span of this study she spent two to four hours a week on art lesson preparation compared to the half-hour she said she would have normally spent. The viewing lessons required her to do more research about the art and artist featured in the lesson, as well as plan for the related follow-up art production activity. Consistent with action research methodology we found that time for reflection was a very important part of the study. After each lesson Cheryle and I talked about how it went. I was interested in hearing Cheryle's own assessment of the afternoon's activities. One important discovery she made after reflecting on the first lesson caused her to change her approach in subsequent lessons. This was the realization that she had been doing too much of the talking and the whole oral response activity had dragged on too long. She had made a gallant attempt to get through all the steps in the viewing process in that first lesson. Adjustments were made as a result of that devotion of time to reflection. The time we individually spent reflecting on each lesson and the time we took to share our perceptions with each other in turn impacted on how the time for the various activities was managed. In our discussion after the first lesson, Cheryle expressed her frustration with trying to “cover” all of the steps in the viewing process and retain the students' attention. She felt this dissatisfaction more acutely than I did as an observer. In her journal she wrote “I, we, ran out of time -- this may be why the writing was minimal. . .. I will have to allow more time for the hands-on activities as well as the journal responses” (journal entry, Sept. 19, 1997, p. 2). Adjustments had been made for the second lesson and the “talk time” was limited to avoid exhausting ideas. They had a wide variety of things they saw and wanted to say -- so much that they couldn't as I closed it down [to] keep their interest up. . .. The pacing of the afternoon's lesson was quicker than the first two. I prefer a faster pace -- viewing with not as many questions [from me] but providing more time for the activity and journal writing (journal entry, Sept. 26, 1997, p.6). Time management was facilitated by the use of a posted agenda detailing the activities of the afternoon. Specific times were not given but the listed sequence of activities helped to keep everything on track. “I like the students to see the whole picture of what we'll do throughout the afternoon. Providing an agenda helps me do this” (journal entry, Nov.7, 1997, p.20). Reflecting and Adapting Cheryle reflected, at the end of the study, that it was important to examine how things went after the weekly lessons, and then to make any necessary changes in delivery. She speculated that when she plans lessons in the future she would plan “quicker lessons -- less talk from me -- more student with student interaction, group work, projects, correspondence” (interview, Dec. 18, 1997, p. 2). She suggested modifications to the viewing process outlined in the curriculum guide would be to “shorten the steps --encourage teachers not to spend a lot of time on any particular step -- go through briefly” (p. 2). This purposeful manipulation of the way the viewing process model is organized and presented to the class was a significant factor in how well it “worked”. Any model of instruction included in a curriculum guide is no more than print on paper until a teacher and students bring it to life in the classroom. Sensitive assessment and response to the needs of both the teacher and the students necessitates constant tweaking of the model. Cheryle realized upon reflection that the lessons were better if she did not try to cover all of the steps in the viewing process every time, or always in the same order. She made adjustments to the instructional model based on the kind of art viewed and the kind of art production activities planned. “Some days go through all of the steps and other days only a few” (interview, Dec. 18, 1997, p.1). At the end of the study Cheryle remarked that rather than introduce new concepts each week -- as she had been doing each week for ten weeks -- she would draw the lesson out more: “a lesson would last 2-3 weeks” (interview, Dec. 18, 1997, p. 3). She felt that it seemed like a lot of content to cover in a short time frame. We had planned the lessons with a new artist and work of art introduced each week to a) correspond to the selected thematic units for other areas of study such as language arts and, b) to expose the students to as wide a variety of art as possible within the limited time frame. In fact, the unit outlines had been considerably cut back from the original plan. In retrospect we realized that depth was sacrificed for breadth. In the future, Cheryle said she would “probably not” use the viewing process every week, but perhaps use it once or twice per theme (interview Dec. 18, 1997, p. 2). The many opportunities for response to art through a variety of modes of expression is another example of the scope of the viewing process. A major part of lesson planning was the consideration of the kind of response activities to be included. Oral, written and art production response activities were the three main components of each lesson, but no two lessons were the same. Some lessons included a whole group discussion lasting half an hour while in other lessons the oral response segment lasted only ten minutes. Sometimes the first impressions, descriptions or interpretations were written, other times they were spoken, or a combination of the two modes was employed. Students answered set questions, used guiding word prompts, did free writing or creative writing. Groupings varied between large groups, small groups, partners, and individual activities. The quality and the quantity of the written responses concerned Cheryle. After the second lesson she wrote the following in her journal: “Written responses were more detailed than last week. However, still not as much as I would like to see” (journal entry, Sept. 26, 1997, p. 6). The next lesson, which featured the Picasso print generated much longer, more interpretive and opinionated written responses from the students. Six weeks later, after the ninth lesson, Cheryle expressed how pleased she was with the students' progress. When they had to pick a picture and tell why they liked it, most did a fine job explaining the reasons. I found they especially enjoyed responding back to each other. They wrote some interesting in-depth responses. It was like they connected to each other in their writing. It was neat, thrilling to watch this. This was the part I was unsure of -- it turned out way better than I had anticipated (journal entry, Nov. 28, 1997, p. 25). At our last meeting I asked Cheryle how well student performance matched up with her expectations. She replied: “Student performance was higher than I anticipated. Writing was the least -- but that depended on the writing activity. Board questions I rate low -- minimal answers. Few questions or trading response books worked better, students seemed to write more” (interview, Dec. 18, 1997, p. 3). Oral response was usually teacher directed and dominated. For the first lesson Cheryle composed a large quantity of questions to guide herself and the students through the steps in the viewing process. Starting off as an aid, these questions became a hindrance later in the lesson. Cheryle sensed that some of the students were getting restless and distracted but felt she had to get through all of the questions. In our post-lesson conference we discussed the situation and we decided it would be better to “go with the flow” and follow her good “teacher instincts” about when enough was enough. She realized that fewer good thought-provoking questions were more valuable than too many low-level factual recall questions. As Cheryle became more familiar and comfortable with the viewing process she got to know her students better and the teacher-student interaction also seemed to be more comfortable. By the end of October she remarked: It's true, I am much more comfortable with planning and expressing my ideas for the lessons. At first I was uncertain as to what exactly I was doing. Now I'm comfortable, more relaxed with going with my own thoughts and feelings. I keep telling myself everything is going fine -- I'm trying, I'm learning. I just try not to be too hard on myself or the students (journal entry Oct. 30, 1997, p. 17). The students' artistic expression through the production of their own art was a very important form of response to the art viewed in the classroom lessons. The whole process of looking carefully at a work of art, trying to figure out how the artist created it and sharing their observations and ideas with each other, inspired the students to create their own art. The students' comments in class and their journal entries indicated that they looked forward to the art-making activities that usually followed the viewing activities. Cheryle too enjoyed the art production part of the lesson and often participated in art production herself. She made the art samples she used to explain the activity to the class. Teacher-made samples were used to demonstrate the techniques and materials to be used as well as model the creative process of transforming an idea into visual form. She described the problems she encountered and the solutions she tried as she created the work so that the students would better understand the process and the expectations. Art production activities were designed to reinforce concepts explored during the viewing process. For example, after examining J.S.Copley's composition and use of space, and reviewing the concepts of foreground, middleground and background, the students were given the opportunity to create their own portraits “after Copley”. Since texture was the focus of part of the discussion that took place while viewing the slide, the student models took their turns dressed in a brocade waistcoat, velvet jacket and lace collar (a stuffed toy took the place of the squirrel). Since we considered art production to be an integral part of the response to art, Cheryle reflected on it in her journal after each lesson. For example, after the Copley lesson she noted “the wide range of sketching skills -- concept of space” (journal entry, Sept. 19, 1997, p. 3). Assessments of the students' strengths and weaknesses in art making helped to guide future instruction. Cheryle commented on the fact that some students used space well while others demonstrated a very limited understanding. This was, therefore, an area that she felt would need more explicit instruction. The teacher's comments sometimes included self-critical reflection. After the second lesson she said, “I did forget to mention how we can mix colours to get new colours . . . I'm really noticing my explanations are not as organized or specific as they usually are . . .” (journal entry, Sept. 19, p. 5). When the students were finishing their self-portraits during the following week Cheryle made a point of encouraging students to mix their paints for a wider range of colours. Students were usually allowed to select their own subject for their artwork within a given broad theme. In spite of having viewed particular works of art, the students did not try to directly copy or imitate the artist's work. Ideas may have been generated by the viewing activity but students created their own original works in response to the viewing. Cheryle encouraged students to think about how the artist dealt with an idea or solved a problem, and apply that understanding to their own work. Instructions for art production frequently required the students to reflect on the observations made during the oral discussion about the image: “Arthur Shilling used strong colours to show how he felt, how important his people were to him . . . think about what's important to you” (lesson #2 notes, Sept. 26, 1997). Some activities, such as creating the symbolic pictures after viewing slides and prints of the Algonquin Legend Painters, really inspired the students. Cheryle wrote: “This is also the first time that many have asked if they could start a second picture. I said `sure'” (journal entry, Nov. 28, 1997, p. 26). The activities that proved to be the most useful for assessment were the written journal responses, the oral responses/discussions, and the art projects. Anecdotal records and checklists were the assessment methods used. Cheryle maintained that most of the curriculum objectives had been addressed, and met, during the course of this study. When I asked her if she felt that the students' viewing art experiences may have affected performance in other areas she replied that she “couldn't say for certain”, but that “growth has occurred in most areas of their studies. They are more observant -- but were before report cards came out first term” (interview, Dec. 18, 1997, p. 4). Report cards came out in early November, about two-thirds of the way through the study. Cheryle had noticed some growth over that time but couldn't attribute it specifically to the experiences in art class. The determination of the effect of the viewing art experience on learning in other areas is beyond the scope of this short-term study. Involvement in the Study Involvement in this research project had an effect on the students and teacher and influenced the implementation experience for all of the participants. The four students who participated in the pull-out interviews and whose journals were a source of data in the study, were all eager to participate from the very beginning. They all avowed they liked art, and were very cooperative both in the classroom and in our private interviews. My presence in the classroom to observe the lessons every Friday afternoon likely had an effect on the participants. The idea that an adult “from main office” was very interested in what they were doing in art, may have influenced the students' performance. During the first few lessons I was a bit of a distraction for some of the students. Even though Cheryle carefully prepared them for my presence in their room, they were very curious about me and what I might do. The students quickly got used to me and by about the third lesson they seemed to be quite comfortable and accepting of me. I kept very quiet during the lessons in the hope that once discussion got going everyone would forget that they were being observed. I interacted with the students immediately after lunch every Friday afternoon, prior to the start of the class. They always greeted me when I arrived in the class. I chatted with them before the bell rang and the lesson started. During this pre-lesson chat time I gathered anecdotal data. The students eagerly showed me their little treasures or proudly pointed out their artwork that had been put on display. One day Morgan quietly shared a book on Mary Cassatt she had found in the library. Another day, Brandi and a few of her friends showed off a book on Picasso they had all been scrutinizing. I circulated around the room during the art production activity to assist Cheryle, and also because I really enjoy talking to students about their art ideas. The students often asked me questions about techniques and materials or explained their ideas to me. Most of the students were cooperative, eager to participate, and generously shared their knowledge about art. They probably realized that I valued art, including their art, and their response to art. Perhaps my presence in the class lent the art lesson a certain importance or validation. A detrimental effect of involvement in the study would be the added stress or pressure the participants felt. Cheryle in particular felt that she was put under extra pressure by being involved in the research study. This may have been partially due to the timing of the study. We began the project in September -- as early in the school year as possible -- in order to complete the data collection in ten weeks (by Christmas). Consequently, the stress of participating in the study was added to the stress of starting a new school year. The teacher and the students did not know each other well. “I still do not know my students well -- well enough to know [if] they are goofing or serious” (journal entry, Sept. 19, 1997, p. 1). Cheryle stated that she felt a drawback to being involved in the study was “time pressure -- I felt this project to be important. I found it took up big chunks of time I had planned for other programs. I felt pressure to do a very good job” (interview, Dec. 18, 1997, p.4). One of the main sources of data was the teacher's journal where she wrote her reflections on the lessons -- on her teaching and on the students' responses -- and on her involvement in the study as a co-researcher during the classroom data-collection phase. While Cheryle agreed that keeping the personal journal was a useful activity, she pointed out that “sometimes it took a while to write in the journal -- I found myself catching up” (interview, Dec. 18, 1997, p. 4). From the teacher's perspective the ten weeks of the classroom phase of the study seemed like a long time: I look forward to the end of the program study. Six lessons down, four more to do. I can see an end in sight. Not that I dislike what I'm doing -- just feel pressured and that this is all too unrealistic to expect of a regular classroom teacher (journal entry, Oct. 30, 1997, p. 18). The motivation to continue came from the perception of benefits to both herself and the students. She reflected that “I know this experience will be to my advantage. I have learned so many new and exciting aspects of art . . .” (journal entry Oct.30, 1997, p. 19). At the end of the study she remarked: “The students I feel learned a lot about viewing art and what it means to them. They were quite cooperative and involved throughout the program” (journal entry, Dec. 5, 1997, p. 27). So, in the end, the benefits of participating in the study seemed to outweigh the drawbacks. At our last interview, when I asked Cheryle if she felt that her actual involvement in the study had worked out the way she had anticipated, she replied: “Better. I had figured the worst -- that students would not participate or be interested. I was wrong” (interview, Dec.18, 1997, p. 4). This was a “modified” action research project due to the fact that I formulated the research question and basic methodology of the study before I approached the teacher-participant. The action research spiral of planning, action, observation, and reflection, happened after the initial purpose for the study had been established. The resulting sense of a lack of ownership may have led to some initial feelings of uncertainty and frustration for the teacher. One Friday morning in October, during our coffee break in the staff room, Cheryle shared her feelings about the pressure of involvement and how she felt “a bit of a panic” -- especially on the Thursday nights before the Friday lesson as she prepared for “the Debby Noble thing” (meeting notes, Oct. 10, 1997, p. 1). This admission indicated how the project had been a real imposition, even though she had agreed on the purpose and process of the study at the beginning. Upon reflection at the end of the ten weeks, Cheryle felt that the amount of collaboration was “Just right. I enjoyed it once we got going on Friday mornings. More collaboration would have been too much” (interview, Dec. 18, 1997, p. 4). She said that she did indeed feel like a co-researcher who had input and control over the lesson planning and delivery: “I felt my input, feedback and observations were important. I felt helpful” (interview, Dec. 18, p. 5). Cheryle's initial anxiety and frustration gave way to a sense of confidence and achievement. I feel I came away from the research experience a better teacher of visual art education. I am confident that I can carry out the remainder of my program to where and how I always felt it should be . . . (interview, Dec.18, p. 6. Conclusion The analysis of the data yielded findings that were divided into three parts. In part one, an analysis of the data collected on the implementation of the viewing process revealed that the response activities that comprised the process supported the development of knowledge, skills and abilities necessary for students to gain access to art. The viewing process was recognized as a recursive process of inquiry and discovery of, and through, art. In the second part of this chapter, four themes were identified as factors affecting student access to art: the time allocated for the steps in the process and the related response activities, the opportunities for students to make personal connections to the art viewed, the extent of social interaction among viewers and, the need for instructional flexibility in recognition of the recursive, fluid nature of viewer response. In part three, four themes emerged from an analysis of the data relating to the teacher's experience of implementing the instructional model in her classroom. A combination of the teacher's attitude, training and experience contributed to the level of comfort with art education that supports risk-taking and professional growth. The second theme was the availability of sufficient support for the teacher in her implementation efforts, including resource materials and consultant services. The teacher's habits of reflection, self-assessment and the ensuing practical adjustments made to instruction contributed to the success of the classroom implementation of the model. Finally, the teacher's involvement in the research study impacted on the total experience of the teacher and the subsequent experience of the students. The Viewing Process The description of the teaching and learning experiences of the participants in this study provides an example of the viewing process in action. The findings show how a particular teacher and her students attempted to use the viewing process to make meaning within their personal contexts. The teacher had to come to an understanding of the instructional model so that she could use it as a guide to facilitate the students' transactions with art. An analysis of this record revealed features of viewer response that impacted on the interpretation and application of the instructional model presented in the curriculum guide. These features are: recursive exploration, unpredictable viewer responses and variations in the steps of the instructional model. Implementation requires a flexible approach applied to the structured exploration of art. Recursive Exploration. The non-linear nature of the viewing process is a feature established by recurring evidence in the data. The students' interactions with art, in both the classroom and the interview situations, demonstrated that the process experienced by them as they responded to art was recursive and exploratory. Response consisted of a cycle of: looking->sharing->relooking->revising->resharing, and so on. The recursiveness of the viewing process indicates that it is an exploration full of the tentative probing and speculative thinking characteristic of an inquiry. The transaction that takes place while viewing is a creative meaning-making process which spans a range of efferent and aesthetic responses. Louise Rosenblatt (1995) believes that “the transaction with any text stirs up both referential and affective aspects of consciousness, and the proportion of attention given to these will determine where the reading will fall on a continuum from predominately efferent to predominantly aesthetic (p. 33). If the word “viewing” is substituted for “reading” the idea of a continuum of response is appropriate for the findings in this study. An examination of the student responses points to an interpretation of the description, analysis and background information steps as more efferently orientated while the first impression and interpretation steps are more aesthetically orientated. But, since the response process is so fluid, analyzing which steps result in which type of response is not practical here. The point is that the process includes opportunities for responses all along the efferent-aesthetic continuum. Unpredictability of Response. The students' responses were frequently unpredictable especially in response to questions posed in the second (first impressions), fifth (interpretation) and seventh (informed judgment) steps of the model. The occurrence of more unpredictable responses corresponds with the observation that those particular steps were more conducive to aesthetic response. Unpredictable response is a feature of the viewing process because viewing is a form of open-ended inquiry where there is not just one `right' answer or one definitive statement to reach. Viewing involves each individual attempting to make connections with his or her own life experience. It was impossible to predict exactly what those connections would be, and impossible to limit responses only to a preplanned focus. This is actually a positive and empowering feature. These personal transactions with the image at hand yield multiple “readings” which are the heart of the whole response process. Terry Barrett points out that works of art are such rich repositories of expression that “no single interpretation is exhaustive of the meaning of an artwork and there can be different, competing and contradictory interpretations of the same artwork” (1994b, p. 9). He also asserts that “the more perspectives we can gain on a work of art, the richer and deeper our experience” (1994a, p. 141). Step Variations. The recursiveness of the viewing process and the unpredictability of response meant that the different steps in the process model varied in emphasis and sequence. Interpretation was generally emphasized more than informed judgment, and description was generally emphasized more than first impression. First impressions, as well as background information, usually became part of the description. The steps did not always occur in the same sequence as laid out in the curriculum guide, in spite of the attempts by the teacher to implement the steps in that order. The students' responses were not always limited to the planned focus. The creative process of viewing shaped the model into a more holistic and organic form, with the steps overlapping and blending together. Implications for Practice A Flexible Approach. The features of the viewing process revealed through the findings have an impact on the interpretation and practical application of the instructional model. The recursive nature of the viewing process supports the interpretation of the viewing process model as a guide for instruction. The model may be interpreted as a suggested series of steps to be used as a guide by the teacher to assist with lesson planning and delivery. The model should not dictate the sequence and direction of the inquiry into a work of art but it can serve to remind the teacher of the different access points through which viewers may pursue their inquiry. We discovered during the study that the model must be manipulated to suit the class, not the other way around. Cheryle discovered, for example, that trying to stick too closely to the model and the related preplanned questions tended to stifle response and frustrate the teacher. Rather than impose a strict viewing routine Cheryle felt that “a more student-centered approach” would allow for, and capitalize on, unexpected student responses which would keep the process interesting for the students and herself (interview, Dec. 18, 1997, p. 3). The particular qualities of the artwork being viewed are also a factor in the way the viewing process evolves. The same order or format for response may not be appropriate for every work. Some works of art may be more suited to Fehr's (1994) “Historical Context” model for viewing which emphasizes the historical and social context of a work prior to formal analysis and interpretation. The findings in this study reveal that response moves back and forth between the steps in the process. Therefore inquiry may begin with a focus on the historical context, move to analysis, and then move back for more historical discussion. The likelihood of unpredictable response means that the teacher must apply the model in a flexible way -- viewing the model as an elastic process rather than as a rigid “how-to” formula. A prescriptive formula for viewing may be clearer and easier to understand and apply, but it would not fit with the recursive and serendipitous nature of viewer response. The planning and delivery of lesson activities must reflect a flexible approach to the instructional model presented in the curriculum guide. In our conferences after the first few lessons I encouraged Cheryle to try to let go of her grip on her planned list of questions, to listen more carefully to the students responses, and to trust her own abilities to “plan on her feet.” The list of questions had started off as an aid but became a hindrance to inquiry when the students' interest started to wane. Instead of helping to bring the students and the work closer together, the questions began to have a distancing effect. It must be recognized that when a new instructional method is implemented the results are often stilted and artificial due to the lack of familiarity and comfort with the new method. The strict linear steps in the model and the preplanned questions provide the teacher with a sense of control and order for what is perceived as a risky venture. It is difficult to “go with the flow” if it is not clear where the flow will lead; the steps in the model help to point the way. Structured Exploration: Balance and Compromise. The flexible application of the model requires a compromise between the tendency for a free-wheeling inquiry and the need for a certain level of structure and direction for the teacher and the students -- especially if the teacher is not confident in the subject area. The structure and direction provided by the seven-step model and the characteristic features of open-ended inquiry must be balanced to suit the needs and abilities of the teacher and students, and also be appropriate to the work of art being viewed. A flexible plan and a willingness to make adjustments to accommodate and capitalize on responses that may be “out of sequence” is needed. Wells (1992) describes the kind of balance required in any inquiry activity: Meaning is co-constructed by the teacher and students together. In such a context, the teacher remains in charge, but his or her exercise of control is manifested not in a once-and-for-all choice between intervening with the “correct” answer or standing back and leaving students to find their own solution, but in the making of moment-by-moment decisions about how to proceed based on knowledge of the topic, understanding of the dynamics of classroom interaction, intentions with respect to the task, and a continuous monitoring of the ongoing talk (p. 46). Strictly following the model as presented in the curriculum guide, without careful consideration and allowance for the students' abilities, knowledge and interests, as well as taking into account the subject matter, form and style of the work to be viewed, may result in a limited and `artificial' viewing experience. Any application of the model would depend on the particular combination of the variables relating to the teacher, the students, and the work. For example, teachers who lack background knowledge in art history and aesthetics may feel more comfortable adhering initially to the linear conception of the viewing model presented in the curriculum guide until they gain the necessary confidence and expertise to freely adapt the model to suit different situations. The teacher's insight and understanding of her students, the work, and the viewing process, contributes to the development and delivery of the lesson plan in a flexible way that balances the features of viewer response with the needs of the teacher and students. Being prepared to allow for exploration but also to guide students back on track to the image at hand, with the model as a guide, is a skill developed through constant reflection. Cheryle always reflected on her lessons and tried to “customize” her plans according to her on-going self-assessment. For example, in September Cheryle realized that the students needed to improve their art vocabulary so that they could make a formal description of works of art. Lists of words were brainstormed and posted, and students were encouraged to refer to those lists as needed. In these initial lessons step two (description) was therefore emphasized. Another time, in the third lesson (the `Picasso' lesson), the teacher determined that a focus on step six, background information, at the very beginning of the lesson, would help to ease student access to Picasso's style of painting. She read a short, entertaining version of Picasso's biography to the children, which captured their interest and provided contextual information that they were able to use later in their interpretation of the print. Questions based on an instructional model can be used to push response forward. When the student viewers cannot articulate a thought or feeling, the teacher can refer to the model and use some of the preplanned questions to try to stimulate response. Having some prepared questions handy can help to jolt viewers into new avenues of thought. Karen Hamblen's (1984) “Art Criticism Questioning Strategy” was a useful guide for developing questions that promote reflective, higher level thinking (Appendix B). The sample questions suggested by Hamblen may be adapted for the lower levels of background knowledge of elementary students . Even though the viewing process resists scripting because of the potential for various, multiple and unpredictable responses, it was a useful practice for the teacher to go through the viewing process herself prior to the lesson to help her to anticipate possible response `scenarios'. Cheryle said that she appreciated it when we looked at the artwork together and shared our responses with each other in our pre-lesson planning sessions. She also remarked that the examples of possible `scripts' in some of the commercial resources were also helpful. The L'Image and Discover Art kits have teacher's guides which include samples of the kinds of questions and responses that may be given to featured prints. These rehearsal opportunities helped Cheryle to prepare for the class and to “expect the unexpected.” I had also shared my observation from looking at art with students in many different classrooms over the years, that no matter how well I think I know a work, students will invariably point out something new to me. I suggested that she not only expect surprises when viewing art with a group of children, but to delight in them and use them to create further understanding. Summary The analysis of the data revealed that the process of viewing was recursive in nature, included unpredictable responses, and imposed variations in the emphasis and sequence of the component steps of the instructional model. A flexible approach is required to achieve a balance between the supportive structure provided by the instructional model, and the open-ended, explorative, process of inquiry through viewer response. Characteristics of Viewer-Response Activities Introduction The findings revealed characteristics of response activities that supported student access to art. Lesson activities that promoted and encouraged viewer response in this study included: adequate time for inquiry into art; the development of cumulative knowledge; a constructivist approach; a range of expressive response modes; and, a selection of appropriate works of art for viewing. Each of these characteristics will be discussed in terms of the findings and related literature. Time Considerations One of the major ways that the recursive “discovery” feature of the viewing process impacts on the planning and organization of lessons is in the consideration of time allocation for the various component activities. The allowance of sufficient time to respond is a crucial element of any activity that forms part of the viewing experience in the classroom. Viewer-response activities such as whole group or small group discussion, journal writing, art-making, and research, all demand time for the cycle of looking, sharing, re-looking, revising, and for expression through talking, writing and art-making. The recursive process of viewing requires adequate time to unfold. Visual images, presented in forms such as paintings or prints offer deceptively “instant” information. The visual elements: all the colours, lines, textures and shapes, are immediately accessible and we think we see what is there right away. “We think that because we have pointed our eyes at something we see what is there to be seen” (Perkins, 1994, p. 24). Perkins explains that this kind of “snapshot” understanding serves us very well for “90%” of the time, but that discovering what a work of art offers a viewer takes a different kind of viewing. The transaction that takes place between a viewer and a work of art takes time -- discovery time. “Looking at art requires thinking -- art must be thought through” (p. 3). Hermine Feinstein (1989) also emphasizes the time element: “Reading art for meaning implies spending time with it -- studying it, rereading it, savouring it . . . . A framework for deciphering the complex visual array present in works of art is also required” (p. 44). The framework for deciphering presented in the Saskatchewan curriculum is the seven-step viewing process instructional model. It was a useful tool for Cheryle as she guided her grade four students to stop, look, and think rather than use the “hit-and-run” approach of most everyday visual encounters. Questions were developed by the teacher for each of the steps in the model. A major component of classroom lessons, as well as my interview sessions, was the timing of the questions, including wait time, and the pacing of the activities. An objective for instruction was to allow students time to look carefully at an image to construct meaning, to express their observations and interpretations, and to revise their ideas if necessary. Students also needed time to understand and react to the expressed ideas and opinions of other students, to make a reply, or to look again at the image -- even to get up out of their seats for a closer look -- and weigh contributions of their fellow viewers for themselves. Effort was made, when possible, to provide students with various opportunities for input and discussion of the image. When students expressed opinions they were usually asked why they thought the way they did. For example, if a student said “It looks real” the teacher would reply “Why, what makes you say that?”, “Where, what parts?” or “How did [the artist] do that?” (lesson #1 notes, Sept. 19, 1997). By extending the student's response with further probing the teacher is allowing the other students time to digest the information offered and to react to it. Adequate time however does not necessarily mean a long time. For step one, first impressions, to get the students' attention and to inject a bit of excitement into the activity in the third lesson they were told “You will only have a short time to look at the print so you will have to look very carefully so that you can write about it in your `Arts Ed' log” (lesson #3 notes, Oct. 3, 1997). The print was turned over and they had only one minute to look, then the print was turned face down again and the students were asked: “when you first saw that picture what did you think? what are some words that came to mind?” This task was structured to gain student attention through a hint of urgency and competition. A few minutes to look and write was suitable for this particular step in the process. The other steps demand much slower and more careful looking. The activity where there should have been more time allocated would be the written responses -- specifically with the follow-up to the students' journal entries. Questions were usually written on the blackboard to help guide students in their written response. Unfortunately the written response activity usually came at the end of the lesson and there often was not time for students to share their ideas aloud. Although the teacher and myself tried to reply in writing to the students individually, the potential source for further discussion generated from their written responses was not exploited. If there had been time the journal writing may have sparked interesting small group discussion, or the teacher may have used selected responses to start whole group discussion. Since the lessons took place on Friday afternoons the discussion could not be taken up the next morning. Scheduling art lessons earlier in the week in order to take advantage of learning opportunities presented by the written journal responses would also be compatible with an integrative approach. Discussion and writing in art criticism may be considered part of language arts since there is an integration of reading, writing, speaking and listening skills. Development of Cumulative Knowledge Instruction in viewing art is intended to encourage students to think about the works of art encountered in class and hopefully to use the knowledge gained from those viewing experiences to help them understand and appreciate art they encounter throughout their lives (Saskatchewan Education, 1991a, p. 5). Through the use of an instructional model to guide response viewers may: Develop a critical awareness of visual qualities and interpretation. . . . Art, as the reproduction of experience might go beyond course or school requirements and take an active role in the constant continuous personal development of the child as an active creator, appreciator and critic (Irwin, 1989, p. 22). An obvious example of cumulative knowledge was in the students' use of art terms and vocabulary. Early in the study effort was made to help students to extend their vocabularies and to understand and use correct terminology through the use of word banks or key word lists. Students also invented their own terms to express their ideas and observations. Lines were “squiggly”, the colour green could be “sick”, a portrait was “gibald”, or an artist who made masks could be called a “maskist”. The students were not discouraged from resorting to these creative terms since they represented critical thinking, were attempts to accurately express ideas, and were a welcome improvement on some of the overused descriptors such a “nice”, “good”, or worse, “I don't know” (meaning “I do not know a word for it”). By the end of the study the four students in the study group, as well as most of their classmates, used descriptive language more frequently and confidently. Of course students began the study at various levels of understanding of the language of art. Jack, for instance, pointed out Pellan's achievement of a three-dimensional quality in his portrait of a young comedian in the first interview: “[it] really looks three dimensional, all that shade and stuff.” Whenever other realistic works were viewed in class Jack was quick to point out the “3D” aspects. This was a concept he understood and could confidently point out for others. As they listened to Jack's observations, other students could learn, or have their ideas confirmed, about what three dimensions rendered on a flat plane meant. The concept was reinforced, with Jack's help, many times throughout the study. The students' understanding of the elements of art and principles of design is cumulative knowledge that was constantly used and expanded. The students started to look for design principles in the works of art viewed and in their own work. Colour, texture, shading and other techniques artists used became part of an expanding repertoire for oral and written response. This knowledge was gained from a variety of sources including shared oral and written response, independent work (such as ferreting out information on artists from the library), art production experiences and information imparted by the teacher. Comparing Art. An activity where students demonstrated their cumulative art knowledge was in the postcard sorting game. Postcards depicting various styles of art were passed out to the students who then took turns volunteering to insert their card on a chart next to the name and definition of a certain style of art. After inserting their postcard into the category of their choice they explained why they made that choice. Jack placed a portrait in the `Realistic' category and explained that it looked like Copley's style “cause it looks like it could be a real guy.” Brandi placed a Picasso card in the Abstract category and explained that “it is not realistic and he uses lots of lines and colours like that.” The students enjoyed the `game-like' form of this activity. If a student was unsure of where to place their card other students helped them out -- which elicited comments about differences in styles. This activity was a useful means of assessing student understanding of concepts taught. There were many times when students compared one work of art to another. In the third lesson Cheryle asked the class “What are some differences between this painting [by Picasso] and the ones we've seen by Shilling and Copley?” (lesson #3 notes, Oct. 3, 1997). The students made the following replies: “I think Shilling's work also has a lot of shapes like circles and some of the same colours but this one is more mixed-up”, “Picasso's paintings are different [they have] more lines”, “Shilling's colours are hotter”, `It's more unreal.” The class continued to discuss the levels of realism in the works studied in class so far. In the last interview session both Jack and Charles were able to recognize the similarities between the subject matter and style of Jackson Beardy and Clemence Wescoupe. Brandi also pointed out that Rebirth by Beardy was similar to Carl Ray's Medicine Bear because of the use of x-rays, and that Beardy and Shilling used the same kinds of strong, bright colours. Activities where works of art are compared and contrasted give students the opportunity to share, and build on their prior understandings of concepts related to art history, art criticism, aesthetics and art production. The comparing and contrasting of works of art merits continued emphasis for its potency as a teaching tool. Students do not need a strong background or vocabulary in the arts to participate in the activity. . . For example, if the discussion focuses on how two artists treated the same subject matter, the talk will inevitably raise questions about formal properties, style, differing time periods or cultures, speculation on the artist's intent and context. (Parks, 1988, p. 57). Contextual Knowledge. Contextual knowledge helps the viewer see what is there in a work of art. “The more knowledge we have to bring to bear, and the more actively we strive to marshal it, the more works of art will reveal themselves” (Parsons, 1994, p. 30). A store of knowledge of the social, cultural and historical contexts in which art is created supports meaningful exploration, and facilitates the transaction between a viewer and the work of art. Contextual knowledge is an important component of informed personal interpretation of art (Anderson, 1988; Fehr, 1994; Feinstein, 1989). Terry Barrett reminds us that art does not emerge in an “aesthetic vacuum” but that “all art is in part about the world in which it emerged. . . [and] all art is in part about other art” (1994b. p. 12). There was a significant difference in the quality of student response between the first interview when no contextual information was supplied to the students, and the third lesson when contextual information was presented. “It looks nice”, “it looks real” and “it makes me feel happy” are representative of the limited responses to Pellan's Jeune Comedien. They did not know who Pellan was, or where, when, why or how he painted. Granted, since this was also the first interview, they may have been reluctant to risk making any speculations. In the third lesson, when the students had learned something about Picasso and his work, their responses were generally strong and original. Learning about Picasso from listening to the teacher read a book about him in class seemed to spur interest in contextual information. A few students were even inspired to go to the library to do their own research. The students seemed interested in this type of information. They wanted to learn about the life and times of the artists and to get a sense of the real people in the story behind the art. As Elliot Eisner points out, “the more we bring to a work the more we are likely to construe meaning from it” (1972, p. 107). Most of the steps in the viewing process helped to make meaning from looking at the work, but step six was where they could look for background information that contributed to understanding, but was external to the work . Laura Chapman identified “lack of background information” as “an obstacle to active perception” that teachers must assist students to overcome (1978, p. 65). Although time was allocated to step six, background information, the teacher felt that there “wasn't enough time to really find things out.” Opportunities for students to do research was minimal and there was not enough preparation time available for the teacher herself to gain all the background information she felt was necessary. Cheryle was grateful for the resource materials full of background information that were available to her, but lamented not having enough time to read all of it or to organize how to use it more efficiently in the classroom. The findings indicate that this was due to the relatively short time allocated for the data collection, and the sense that the predetermined schedule had to be adhered to, combined with the normally busy schedule of the teacher. At the end of the study Cheryle wrote in her journal that she would prefer to do more small group activities (journal entry, Nov. 28, 1997, p. 25). Individual and small group research projects would be suitable for the examination of the contexts of works of art selected for viewing. Constructivist Approach Although many of the activities in the study were teacher directed and dominated, the more constructivist activities, where students were actively engaged, held their interest longer and seemed the most productive and satisfactory. “Children enjoy looking at works of art when the process is active, filled with suspense, and intellectually demanding” (Chapman, 1978, p. 195). In retrospect Cheryle felt she would have liked to have included more active student-centered activities and less “teacher-talk”. The inquiry process of viewing art works in a critical, exploratory way lends itself to the constructivist approach. Gordon Wells states that learning involves: . . . the cumulative construction of knowledge over many encounters with relevant problems, with the learner bringing what was learned on previous occasions to make connections with information presented in each new problem and thereby making more and better sense of the phenomena in question (1992, p. 41). The viewing process instructional model provides the framework for the “many encounters” with the problem of discovering what the work of art is about or what it means. The students brought their prior knowledge to each new viewing experience to make the personal connections necessary for understanding. “Constructivist teachers use raw data and primary sources. . . and [frame] talks around cognitive activities such as analysis, interpretation and prediction” (Brooks and Brooks, 1993, p. 105). The categories for inquiry in the viewing process include analysis and interpretation. The students made predictions about things such as the function of the work, use of materials, the artist's intention and other contextual information. Also, next to the original work of art, prints and slides are as close to primary sources as can be found. The “secret ballot” activity with the students' masks is an example of the constructivist approach. There was lots of free discussion as small groups of students tried to persuade each other of the merits of the different masks. The real value in the whole exercise was the critical discussion about the masks that the students had with each other. Another constructivist activity that was included in the study was the “buddy” activity in the eighth lesson. In this activity students worked with a partner to examine an illustration by Terry Gallagher from Murdo's Story and report their findings on the artist's use of line, texture, value and space, to the class. Cheryle and I were impressed with how focused and on-task the students were once they began examining their own copy of one of Gallagher's illustrations. Some activities could easily have been made more interactive but, either because of the content or the mood of the class, Cheryle decided it would be best to keep them more teacher directed. An example of this decision-making is the “interview” activity during the viewing of Head of a Weeping Woman with Handkerchief by Picasso. After a brief discussion the students were asked to make up a list of three questions they would like to ask the woman in the painting, and then to answer the questions themselves “like role playing” (lesson #3 notes, Oct. 3, 1997). Cheryle had to remind them to “keep your questions and answers a little more on the serious side” (lesson #3 notes). She told me later that she was uncomfortable with the idea of letting them interview each other since they seemed “to be on the edge of silliness” (lesson #3 notes). She therefore decided not to risk group work at that time. Most of the opportunities for group work occurred later, in lessons six, eight and ten -- when the teacher and students knew each other better. Active participation in the viewing process was necessary to retain attention and avoid boredom. Some of these grade four students expressed their preference for activities that included physical, tactile participation. After the first lesson Brandi wrote in her journal: “My favorite part was when we drew Daniel and when we felt the things in the texture bag. . . but the only thing I didn't like was when we had to sit there and look at slides.” The first lesson was when Cheryle felt she had indeed spent too long on the slide questions and decided to make adjustments to the time allocation. The students enjoyed the tactile experience of the “texture bag”. The teacher had gathered together a collection of materials that were depicted in the portrait of Daniel Crommelin Verplanck. The students took turns to reach into the bag, pull out a piece of fabric, and match it where it could be seen in the painting. This short activity helped them to gain an understanding of the textural qualities the artist conveyed with paint, through real tactile experience. The viewing process was made more relevant and interesting to students by incorporating activities that called for brief active, physical involvement in the lesson. Something as simple as taking turns going up to the screen and using a paintbrush to gesture how expressively paint was applied by the artist, or to point out things they had observed in the slide, captured (or recaptured) the students' attention and kept them focused on the task. Gordon Wells (1992) emphasizes the importance of group interaction. Learning occurs when prior knowledge is used to interpret information presented through questions and the search for answers. “Among peers, this process is made fully apparent, as the contribution of one student is extended, challenged, or modified by the contributions of others” (p.110). Barrett argues that the process of making meaning from viewing works of art is made richer and deeper through communal “conversation” (Barrett, 1994a, p. 141). In this study, the talk rarely reached a level that may be considered a true ”conversation” in the sense of an extended exchange of ideas equally among participants. Most of the talk consisted of the teacher's questions and the students' responses (although the students' responses were not always direct answers to the questions posed). The focus was more student to teacher, rather than student to student. The student-to-student talk seldom went beyond the brief exchange of a few comments. In this grade four class, during whole-group viewing, the students eagerly contributed their own ideas and listened to the ideas of others, but seldom reacted by picking up and extending those ideas in a conversational way. The development of the skills of communal conversation may be a long range tangential goal of classroom viewing experience, but it was unrealistic to expect that level of dialogue in this class of grade four students. The exceptions to this lack of conversation, or extended dialogue, were the small group and partner activities. A level of dialogue where there was continuous student-to-student discussion did occur in the small group situations. Small groups were more conducive to the student to student exchange of ideas and building understanding collaboratively. The complex variable of interpersonal relationships in the classroom was especially evident in the large group viewing activities when the class gathered on the floor in front of the teacher who held the print or illustration for viewing. The fluent, vocal students clustered directly in front while the quieter and shyer students tended to sit on the perimeter of the group. Cheryle noted where everyone was before she started and was careful to check that everyone had an unobstructed view. She was very conscious of the need to draw quieter students into the discussion while at the same time trying not to appear to be avoiding the more demanding front row. While not everyone may not have wanted to share their responses to the artwork orally with others, they may still have been actively engaged in the viewing activity and involved in their own transaction with the work. Two of the students in the interview group, Morgan and Charles, were very quiet in class but when they did choose to share their thoughts aloud, or in their journals, their responses show evidence of their thoughtful engagement with the work. A way to help balance, and include, various “readings” is to build in occasions to circumnavigate some of the effects of classroom dynamics. The provision of alternative modes of expression such as writing and art-making, as well as using a variety of groupings gives the less vocal students more chances to express themselves. “If children see art, read, speak, and write about art, and listen to discussions about art, they are practising what is useful to them in art and in learning to command language” (Chapman, 1982, p. 136). Opportunities for students to explore artwork by talking through their ideas with others is an important component of the practice of art criticism in the classroom. Students were also encouraged to record their ideas at various steps in the viewing process in their art response journals. Sometimes the first impressions were jotted down, descriptions were listed or interpretations were explained. A couple of times the response was extended into creative writing when the students wrote their own legends and stories inspired by the art they had viewed. The quality and quantity of the written responses varied from lesson to lesson and from student to student of course, but the quiet students were generally as expressive in their writing as the other students. Charles' written response to the Picasso print was especially expressive, and Morgan also wrote some concise and insightful entries in her journal. The teacher-student dialogue in the journals did not work out as well as we had hoped. Since a new work of art was introduced each week there was not enough time to build up a dialogue about each work. Also, the distance of a week time span between each entry made comments seem remote and after-the-fact. Consequently, when Cheryle or I wrote back to students about their response, the follow-up replies from the students, if any, consisted of only one or two words. The student-to-student written exchange was more productive. They seemed to enjoy the opportunity to comment on each other's written responses to the art viewed in class. Cheryle did not decide to try student-to-student journal exchanges until the ninth lesson. In retrospect she wished she had tried this dialogue idea earlier, and used it more. For the teacher-student dialogue journal idea to work well, time would have to be set aside soon after the viewing experience, for the teacher to write to the students, and for the students to reply. Since on-going dialogue about a specific work of art may not be feasible when teachers must write to each student in their class, and when new works are constantly being introduced, it may organized so that small groups of students at a time submit their journals to her/him. A buddy system where students write to a partner would also be useful. These grade four students did not have enough experience with written dialogue to be proficient at it. More teacher modelling would have been appropriate to demonstrate to the students how dialogue journals work, and to clarify expectations. The modelling may include eliciting oral response from the students while reviewing the teacher's written response to an artwork on an overhead projector, or the teacher could exchange her own response journal with individual students. More opportunities for student-to-student written dialogue would also help the students to learn from each other. The teacher could draw specific attention to thoughtful and insightful written exchanges between students. The private interaction between the viewer and the work of art is shaped by cumulative knowledge and understandings derived from previous viewing experiences which include social interactions and inner dialogues. The initial or pre-critical response to a work of art is a personal individual response. According to Barrett (1994a), “the percipient is always the individual observer” (p. 71). Writing or talking about perceptions is an integral part of the viewing process. “Describing what we see telegraphically in words, on paper, or by talking to ourselves, helps to heighten and stabilize perception” (Perkins, 1994, p. 40). When students share their responses to art they are creating a new “text” that in turn becomes a source for further dialogue. This linking of various oral and written response texts, or “intertextual tying”, further transforms understanding of experience. (Haussen, Harste and Short, 1990, p. 264). As we approach graphic art . . . we create a story about that work: the subject, the colours, the form, the style, and the artist. We take this story to our next encounter with a work of art, attending to both similarities and differences . . . in this process we have gained a richer understanding of graphic art (p. 263). Art making is an important form of response to art. Experience with the creative process, where an idea is transformed into visual form through the manipulation of art materials, contributes insight and understanding to the process of making meaning from viewing art. Appreciation is enhanced when one recognizes the kind of thought and skill involved in the production of the work. This relationship to the production experience contributes to the viewer's search for meaning. Irrespective of the media or art forms in which they work, artists and children develop ideas from their own life experiences, interpret the ideas in visual form, and use media to capture their own expressive intent. . . . When these relationships are made apparent children have a personal basis for comprehending the work artists do (Chapman, 1978, p. 120). These grade four students were engaged in their own artistic development and were keenly interested in how other artists solved technical problems. From the questions they asked during the art production activities it was clear that many wanted to learn the skills to create their own realistic and detailed works. Art production helps to answer questions related to art viewing. Where did the artist get his or her idea? How was the idea developed with those materials? What were the steps in the process? What problems and solutions were revealed? The decision making that occurs during art production is a natural reflection of, and response to, the decisions made during art viewing. Art production and art criticism are closely related. Hurwitz and Day (1991) contend that the “reciprocal relationship between learning to make art and learning to recognize, attend to, and understand art should guide the planning of art instruction” (p. 287). The connections between art production and art criticism may be strengthened further when students are encouraged to respond to the artwork of their classmates. “Too often in classroom situations we ask the child artist to be interpreter and spokesperson for his or her own work. This common activity diminishes the responsibility of the viewer to thoughtfully respond to works of art” (Barrett, 1994, p. 13). The Saskatchewan grade six curriculum includes guidelines for responding to student art (1994, p. 548). It is pertinent here to remember Feldman's statement that “the work of art that is not examined critically, which is to say the work of art that does not receive an answering human response, is incomplete” (Feldman, 1988, p. 64). The activities that are planned as part of the viewing experience in the classroom should include active involvement and opportunities for response in a variety of modes. Talking, writing and art production are three ways students can express their ideas and feelings about art. “ We should organize art teaching practices so that they entail the use of verbal and written expression as well as the selection and shaping of visual materials” (Feldman, 1976b, p. 147). Integrating other modes of expression not used in this study, such as dance, drama, and music, may also yield rich results. Selection of Artwork for Viewer-Response The work of art selected for viewing is critical to the transaction that is the heart of the response process. The reproductions of works of art that were selected for this study proved to be an appropriate choice. A wide range of styles, techniques, materials, time periods and artists were represented. The works were selected according to three main criteria: 1) relevancy to the unit theme, 2) the potential for connections to be made to students' lives and interests and, 3) the availability of quality reproductions. (Appendix C) Factors Affecting Implementation of the Viewing Process The implementation of the viewing process in Cheryle's grade four class was directly dependent upon her level of readiness for the challenges of trying something new. Michael Fullan states that assessment of individual readiness for innovation initiation addresses these questions: “Does [the innovation] address a perceived need? Is it a reasonable change? Do they possess the requisite knowledge and skills? Do they have the time?” (Fullan, 1991, p. 63). Adequate background knowledge and experience in the discipline, a belief in the value of viewer-response, and the various supportive resources available to her, were key factors in the success of Cheryle's efforts to plan and teach viewing-art lessons. Preparation: Comfort,Confidence and Competence The findings show that the teacher's attitude towards teaching art in general, and towards implementing the viewing process in particular, was shaped by her background knowledge and experience in art and art pedagogy. Cheryle's personal favourable encounters with art, as well as her professional training, contributed to her comfort and confidence towards teaching art. She believed there was a need for the viewing process in her art program, and felt that the students should have the opportunity to benefit from looking at art, as she had done as a student. Cheryle possesses the essential qualities Parks (1988) identifies: “The ability to acquire meaning from works of art requires the same nurturing process that reading does. The teacher must set the example of one who enjoys art, values it, finds it challenging,and, above all, gains meaning from it” (p. 55). A positive attitude derived from successful experiences with art proved to be a necessary ingredient for the risk-taking and critical self-assessment demanded of Cheryle as she attempted to implement the instructional model. Preparedness includes knowledge and understanding of the curriculum. Familiarity with the curriculum document contributed to a sense of confidence. Cheryle referred to the foundational and learning objectives for planning and assessment. She used the curriculum as a framework, preferring to develop her own unit ideas relating to general cross-curricular themes rather than following the sample units in the guide. The curriculum model units did not prove to be very useful. The observation that teachers lack confidence in the arts has been well documented in recent research in Saskatchewan, and has been identified as a major hurdle to curriculum implementation (Desrosiers, 1996; Little, 1997; and Saskatchewan Learning, 1997). In this study, Cheryle initially expressed apprehension about implementing the viewing process, based on her perception of curriculum expectations. Even though she had reached a level of comfort with the curriculum to the point where she could risk participating in this research study, she still felt anxious at the prospect of someone assessing her efforts. Cheryle felt that she was not as well prepared for teaching visual arts as she should be. I felt it was necessary to bolster her confidence by reassuring and encouraging her. (I have noticed in my capacity as a curriculum inservice facilitator that teachers are often very self-critical and think they should become experts in an area within an unrealistically short time). Desrosiers (1996) believes that “regular classroom teachers are often poorly equipped to teach the arts” (p. 6). She explains that since “few students in Saskatchewan have received consistent, well-sequenced instruction in these areas in elementary grades”, many of our educators -- who are graduates of the school system -- are “either ignorant or ambivalent about the arts and their role in society” (p. 7). Cheryle thought that curriculum implementation is “especially tough on older teachers who didn't have art” (interview Sept. 5, 1997, p. 3). Besides her knowledge and experience with art, Cheryle's understanding of the needs and abilities of her students was also crucial to the implementation process. This understanding provided vital insight into how connections may be made between the students and the art. Lanier acknowledges this advantage: If art is anything more than subject matter, if it is of utility in the complete and wholesome development of children, then it should be taught not by an art specialist. . . but by the classroom teacher whose many hours of relationship with those children have revealed to him their needs, interests and capacities (1976, p. 18). Time. From my own experience as a teacher and as a consultant I know that teachers are generally very busy people who “constantly feel the critical shortage of time” (Fullan, 1991, p. 33). Implementing a new curriculum imposes further demands on their time. From my brief visits to the school during the study I was made acutely aware of the myriad of duties Cheryle juggled in a typical day. Besides dealing with a lively class of preadolescents some of her other duties were: hallway and recess supervision, organizing and supervising lunch time hot dog sales, attending staff meetings, division meetings, committee meetings, parent meetings, preparing report cards, as well as participating in this research study. Finding any time to review curriculum was a remarkable feat. Cheryle said she spent some evenings and weekends on it and stated that “there is a need to spend time with it . . . [but] finding time is hard” (interview Sept. 5, 1997, p. 3). At the time this study took place teachers also had new curricula in Science, English Language Arts, Social Studies and Math to implement, as well as Arts Education. Preparing for the viewing art classes meant that time had to be spent on research as well as on organizing the related art production activities. Cheryle revealed that she spent from “two to four hours a week” (interview Dec. 18, 1997, p. 4) on art lesson preparation, aside from our Friday morning planning session. If she had to spend an equal amount of time on other areas of study it would be a total of 20 to 28 hours a week in preparation, on top of all the other duties mentioned earlier. Granted, her involvement in the research study may have impacted on her time more than normal, but if the intention is to implement the viewing process as outlined in the guide, and as it was in the study, it is obvious that time is a crucial factor. (Saskatchewan Education, 1998, p. 20). Interaction. Opportunities for professional development have an impact on implementation efforts in the classroom. Cheryle's professional development related to this study mainly entailed working with a consultant and participating in the data collection phase of this research study, as well as, to a much lesser extent, attending inservices and networking with peers. Wells notes that “the most effective professional development will be classroom based and problem oriented. It should be conducted in ways that encourage collaboration among colleagues both within and between institutions” (1992, p. 170). The provision of opportunities and incentives for teachers to network with peers following curriculum inservices nurtures curriculum innovation. Teachers, as well as students, may benefit from problem-solving with a group and perhaps expand their own “zones of proximal development” (Vygotsky, 1978) through the implementation experience. Implementation, whether it is voluntary or imposed, is nothing other than a process of learning something new. One foundation of new learning is interaction. Learning by doing, concrete role models, meetings with resource consultants and fellow implementers, practice of the behaviour, and the fits and starts of cumulative, ambivalent, gradual self-confidence all constitute a process of coming to see the meaning of change more clearly (Fullan, 1991, p. 85). In this study the teacher's role was to guide the students through the viewing process, and my role as a consultant was to “guide the guide”. I assisted Cheryle with her lesson planning, which included the practice of going through the viewing process together, using the instructional model. This support also entailed supplying her with information on art history and art production. I was able to supplement Cheryle's own background knowledge and research with explanations about artists, styles, technique, materials and processes. Cheryle had never requested consultant services, and admitted feeling anxious and slightly intimidated at first. Mid-way through the study she expressed her appreciation: “the insights and advice and direction were valuable to me and I feel I have a much better, more accurate understanding of the visual art strand” (journal entry, Dec. 5, 1997, p. 27). Involvement in the study broadened her knowledge and understanding of art. At the end of the study Cheryle's advice to teachers was to try working with a consultant because “you will gain much in terms of new insights, information and knowledge, and ways to go about implementing new curriculum -- as well as excellent resource materials” (interview, Dec. 18, 1997, p. 6). Fullan (1982) points out that change is a complex and personal process which involves anxiety, loss and struggle. Collaborative action research is an opportunity for teachers to reflect and improve on their practice with the support and encouragement of the other participants. Even though there were only two of us, both with very demanding jobs, we remained mutually supportive and optimistic about our involvement in the study as we followed the action research spiral. Consideration must be given, when planning time lines, to the fact that action research is intensive and taxing for the participants. Consultants, who have been teachers themselves but who do not formally evaluate teachers, are in a special position to support teachers as they endeavour to bring the curriculum to life in the classroom. Teachers who are uncomfortable in the subject area due to a perceived lack of background knowledge and skills would benefit from the one-on-one guidance and encouragement of a consultant. Arts education is an area where consultants and catalyst or pilot teachers, acting as mentors and peer coaches, are needed to support generalist elementary teachers. Concluding Remarks The viewing process instructional model used in this study is a useful framework consisting of a suggested series of steps to guide student access to art. The steps in the model should not dictate the sequence or flow of the inquiry, but should remind the teacher of the different points of access through which student-viewers may persue their inquiry into a work of art. Access to art is a journey of discovery where meaning is constructed by the viewer along the way. The teacher may use the steps in the instructional model as signposts pointing the way for exploration through transaction with the work. The signposts mark a network of routes which sometimes cross over and overlap each other. Viewer response impacts on the decisions about which routes will be taken. A teacher who is familiar with the territory, and recognizes important landmarks, may be an adept and effective guide. Various vehicles for response may be used to assist the construction of meaning such as oral discussion, journal writing and research. Viewers start the journey with a supply of prior knowledge, skills and abilities, and use various response vehicles to acquire more along the way. Sometimes viewers travel in groups or with a partner and sometimes they travel alone. The journey takes time. Access is achieved when student-viewers have adequate guidance, time and knowledge to transact and respond to art. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS This study addressed the problem of how teachers can help students gain access to works of art through participation in the creative process of active viewing. Active viewing occurs through engagement in artistic dialogue which leads to the construction of meaning. The data collected from one generalist elementary teacher and four of her students provided evidence that the implementation of the instructional model for the viewing process presented in the curriculum guide fostered artistic dialogue and the development of knowledge skills and abilities needed to access art. While the nature of this study precludes the presentation of broad generalizations, some conclusions can be made. Access to art is not a one-time event, but is a cumulative, developmental achievement by each viewer engaged in a personal transaction with art. The quality and depth of the transaction was dependent upon the cumulative knowledge and personal connections made by the individual viewers, and the particular character-istics of the work of art. This encounter is enhanced through the provision of adequate time to respond and opportunity to interact with others. An examination of the students' oral and written responses to art revealed that the use of the viewing process instructional model facilitated access to art when the following factors were in place:
From the point of view of the generalist elementary teacher who participated in this study, the instructional model was valuable because it provided a framework for questioning and organizing lesson activities. Cheryle was satisfied with the results of her efforts to implement the instructional model in her classroom, but the data revealed that this successful implementation was dependent upon a great deal of preparation and planning. While viewing art is an inquiry process that can be full of exploration and discovery for both teachers and students, if teachers are to feel adequately prepared to guide the students through that process they must feel comfortable with their own level of artistic knowledge, skills and abilities. Implementation was a feasible expectation when certain conditions and supports were in place. The model may be implemented successfully by a generalist elementary teacher if:
Recommendations for Research This study, which is grounded in the experience of one teacher and her students, presents a glimpse into the complex and challenging field of art education. More classroom-based research is needed to fully understand the factors that contribute to the achievement of access to art. I suggest the following as areas for further research:
Action Recommendations For Teachers 1.Professional Development: a) Seek out professional development opportunities. Work with consultants and other resource people. Collaborate with peers to develop unit and lesson plans that integrate -- and balance -- the creative/productive, critical/responsive, and cultural/historical components of the curriculum. Participate in action-research projects on issues relating to teaching art. b) Practice viewing art. Take time to look, listen, express and reflect. Try responding to art in a variety of ways, including keeping an art response journal. Tackle “difficult” art and try to avoid premature conclusions. Share responses with others and participate in artistic dialogue. Find and read models of art criticism in exhibition catalogues and magazines. 2. Practice: a) Approach viewing activities with students as a process of discovery and understand that the teacher does not need to have all of the answers, and that many different interpretations are possible. Be open to alternative ideas. b) Use an instructional model, such as the one outlined in the Saskatchewan curriculum, to guide students through the viewing process. c) Integrate the three components (or four disciplines) into sequential lesson activities built around active viewing experiences. Provide opportunities for individuals to express and share responses in a variety of ways. d) Approach classroom viewing activities as intellectually rigorous inquiries into important forms of human expression. Ask questions that promote higher-level thinking. e) Compile and use a wide range of images of different forms of visual art from a variety of time periods and cultures, including contemporary works. For Administrators and Consultants Support Professional Development: a) Provide inservices and workshops focused specifically on the viewing process. b) Facilitate action-research in art education. c) Provide in-school release time for teachers who lack background training and experience to prepare for viewing art lessons. d) Encourage teachers to collaborate/network with peers to plan thematic units that integrate the three components of art education. e) Provide repeat access to consultant support. f) Monitor arts education implementation. Supervise art classes, especially when the viewing process (critical/responsive component) is the lesson focus. g) Promote success and risk-taking through the recognition of teachers who are attempting to develop professionally as art educators and who are trying to implement the viewing process instructional model in their classrooms. h) Provide adequate and appropriate resources. Assess resource needs and allocate funds for resources for viewing art. Compile and/or produce videotapes featuring classes engaged in viewing and response activities.
APPENDIX A Steps in the “Viewing Art Works” Process *
(Saskatchewan Education, Training and Employment, 1994a, p.547). APPENDIX B KAREN HAMBLEN'S QUESTIONING STRATEGY Category Key Word Process Question Words
Processes and words for formulating questions according to Bloom's Taxonomy (Hamblen, 1984, p.47). APPENDIX C Resource List: Artwork Used in the Study: Work of Art Artist Source
* Reproductions included on the following pages
|
|||||||||||||
