Western Michigan University ScholarWorks at WMU Master's Theses Graduate College 4-2018 Assessing the Benefits and Risks of Choice-Based Art Education in the Modern-Day Classroom Kayla Lindeman Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.edu/masters_theses Part of the Art Education Commons, and the Curriculum and Instruction Commons Recommended Citation Lindeman, Kayla, "Assessing the Benefits and Risks of Choice-Based Art Education in the Modern-Day Classroom" (2018).edu/masters_theses/3412 This Masters Thesis-Open Access is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate College at ScholarWorks at WMU. It has been accepted for inclusion in Master's Theses by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks at WMU. For more information, please contact wmu-scholarworks@wmich. ASSESSING THE BENEFITS AND RISKS OF CHOICE-BASED ART EDUCATION IN THE MODERN-DAY CLASSROOM by Kayla Lindeman A thesis submitted to the Graduate College in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts Frostic School of Art Western Michigan University April 2018 Thesis Committee: Christina Chin, Ph., Chair William Charland, Ph.
Copyright by Kayla Lindeman 2018 ASSESSING THE BENEFITS AND RISKS OF CHOICE-BASED ART EDUCATION IN THE MODERN-DAY CLASSROOM Kayla Lindeman, M. Western Michigan University, 2018 This thesis explores the benefits and risks of choice-based art education by examining the literature and conducting field research in two third grade art classrooms - one that employs a Teaching for Artistic Behaviors-based (TAB-based, a popular version of choice-based art education) approach to art education and another that adheres to a more discipline-based model. Findings related to student observations, student surveys, and parent survey will be presented within these two unique settings. These findings will be matched against claimed choice-based benefits of: increases in student engagement; instructional and learning shifts; and student engagement in authentic art practices.
The findings will also look to assess risks associated with choice, such as: lack of self-directed behaviors; systemic adverse attitudes relating to choice; and difficulty in managing resources. This thesis will also provide suggestions given by advocates of choice as to how to mitigate risks and develop a successful choice-based classroom. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS There are many people who deserve a great deal of thanks for their endless support and encouragement during this chapter in my life. First, I am grateful to my “math-magician” husband, Dan, for his unwavering belief in me and the hours he sacrificed reading over edits and Googling formatting solutions.
Even in the midst of working full-time while completing his own graduate degree, he always offered support, dedicated his time, and gave me the encouragement I needed to reach my goal. Second, I would like to thank the incredibly dedicated professors I had the pleasure of studying under in pursuit of this degree. Thank you to my committee chair, Dr. Christina Chin, who challenged my ideas of art education and constantly pushed me to improve.
Thank you to my professor and committee member, Dr. William Charland, who gave me the tools I needed in order to be successful throughout this program. And thank you to my one-time photography professor, Ginger Owen, who graciously offered to serve on my committee after an inspirational semester of alternative photography techniques. You have all made me a better art educator.
Finally, thank you to the teachers who opened their classrooms to me and allowed me to work with their students during this study. You were instrumental in getting this research project moving and ensuring that necessary components went home with students and came back in time. I could not have done this without your support. ii Acknowledgements—Continued While I’m saddened that my time at Western Michigan University as a graduate student has come to an end, I look forward to the next chapter, applying new knowledge and skills to my teaching practices.
Overall, this program has expanded my knowledge of art education while challenging me to evaluate and adapt my teaching in order to be the best teacher possible for all of my students, and for that, I am truly grateful. Kayla Lindeman iii TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS.ii LIST OF FIGURES.7 The Shift to Choice.7 Teacher as artist.8 Inauthentic art experience.9 The Claimed Benefits of Choice-Based Art Education.10 Shift in instruction and learning.12 Authentic art experiences.15 The Claimed Risks of Choice-Based Art Education.16 Lack of self-directed behaviors.20 Suggestions and Advocacy for Choice.21 iv Table of Contents—Continued Combatting creative block.31 Choice-based classroom.31 Discipline-based classroom.55 Short answer responses.59 v Table of Contents—Continued Student engagement analysis.59 Shift in instruction and learning analysis.60 Authentic art practices analysis.61 Self-directed behaviors analysis.61 Systemic attitudes analysis.63 Student Surveys Analysis.63 Student confidence survey analysis.63 Student agreement survey analysis.66 Parent Survey Analysis. Student Confidence Survey. Student Agreement Survey.
Parent/Guardian Survey. HSIRB Approval Form.83 vi LIST OF FIGURES 1. Comparative Student Confidence Survey Results: Top Two Box Analysis. Comparative Student Confidence Survey Results: Short Answer Question One.
Comparative Student Confidence Survey Results: Short Answer Question Two. Comparative Student Confidence Survey Results: Short Answer Question Three. Choice-Based Classroom Student Confidence Survey Comprehensive Results: Question One. Discipline-Based Classroom Student Confidence Survey Comprehensive Results: Question One.
Choice-Based Classroom Student Confidence Survey Comprehensive Results: Question Two. Discipline-Based Classroom Student Confidence Survey Comprehensive Results: Question Two. Choice-Based Classroom Student Confidence Survey Comprehensive Results: Question Three. Discipline-Based Classroom Student Confidence Survey Comprehensive Results: Question Three.
Comparative Agreement Survey Results: Top Two Box Analysis. Parent Importance Survey Results: Top Two Box Analysis. Parent Agreement Survey Results: Top Two Box Analysis.56 vii INTRODUCTION My training as an art educator was driven by the philosophy of the “Big Idea” curriculum - an approach to art education where students explore an overarching theme over a period of time through a variety of media (Walker, 2001). As a student, this approach seemed promising.
It allowed for students to express their ideas and explore different techniques, all while conceptually crafting a work of art to fit a theme. As described by Walker (2001), “big ideas are important to the work of professional artists - and of students if student artmaking is to be a meaning-making endeavor rather than simply the crafting of a product” (p. Unfortunately, upon leaving the confines of my undergraduate classroom and beginning my field studies, knowledge and use of this approach were scarce. My student teaching placement and my first job as an art educator employed product-driven, discipline-based curricula.
These curricula employed units structured around elements and principles of design, and emphasized diverse exposure to material usage and techniques. As a result, students often produced formulaic projects with little individual choice or variation. Being new to the field, I never sought to question this approach - especially given that these curricula were coming from professionals in the profession of art education, many with over fifteen years of experience. And why would I question it? Parents, administrators, and fellow teachers praised me for the exceptional work my students created; many of whom couldn’t believe I could get students to create such polished works of art.
I remember being at a region-wide art show during my second year of teaching and walking around with my elementary art counterpart and mentor. We were examining the artwork from different schools when we came across a school where every project was different. 1 I remember pointing the nuance out to my mentor and she made a comment that that school must use TAB or Teaching for Artistic Behaviors (a commonly used choice-based approach to art education). I asked her to elaborate.
Although not positive in her reply, she stated that TAB was an approach to teaching art where kids can make whatever they want while using whatever materials they deem fit. I don’t remember the entirely of our conversation, but I remember the mutual feelings of horror as we contemplated what classroom management and getting students to produce polished products would look like with such an approach. And then three years went by… Over the course of those three years, I switched jobs and continued to employ the same product-driven, discipline-based approach to art education, all while receiving glowing reviews from administrators and parents. During that time, I became aware that one of the elementary art teachers in my district employed a TAB-based curriculum and had been doing so for a number of years.
Curious to learn more, I observed this teacher in the Spring of 2017 for a class assignment. This became my first authentic exposure to TAB. The idea of allowing students complete choice in their artistic endeavors was both intriguing and terrifying. I couldn’t think of a better way to foster independent thinking and creativity, promote artistic exploration, and allow students to interact with each other in an authentic, studio-rich environment.
At the same time, I couldn’t help but wonder the risks that accompany a choice-based approach. What challenges in behavior management arise in a TAB environment? What are the perceptions of choice-based art education by administrators and parents who might be conditioned to look at product over process in judging the success of a visual arts curriculum? How does a teacher promote 2 independent thinking and learning in an educational climate riddled with high-stakes tests and concrete approaches? The goal of this thesis is to thoroughly examine a choice-based approach to art education, like TAB, compared and contrasted to a discipline-based approach. I will begin this research by exploring what has been written about choice-based approaches (particularly TAB) compared to Discipline-Based Art Education (DBAE) approaches. I will focus this review of the literature on: the reasons educators switch to choice-based instruction; benefits choice-based advocates claim; risks of employing full-choice; and suggestions for advocacy.
I will then look to assess these benefits and risks through field observation and study in two different third grade classrooms within my school district - one that employs a TAB curriculum, and one that adheres to a more discipline-based approach. With the field research complete, I will look back to the literature to see how my findings compare and contrast to the claims presented. It is here I will look to address any unique findings and hopefully offer explanations or suggestions backed by the literature. 3 RESEARCH PROBLEM To begin, it is important to define what is meant by a choice-based approach to art education and what is meant by a discipline-based approach to art education.
According to Douglas and Jaquith (2009), “Choice-based art education provides for the development of artistic behaviors by enabling students to discover what it means to be an artist through authentic creation of artwork” (p. In this model, students are viewed as artists and teachers work to provide an environment most conducive to student exploration of artistic behaviors (Douglas & Jaquith, 2009). Discipline-Based Art Education, on the other hand, relies little on student exploration, and leans heavily on teacher-driven instruction of art disciplines. This approach, developed by the Getty Center for the Education of the Arts in the mid-1980s, argues that, “if art education is to be accepted as essential to every child’s education, programs will need to be developed that teach content from four disciplines that constitute art: art history, art production, art criticism, and aesthetics” (Getty, 1985, p.
While it is possible for discipline-based approaches to incorporate choice, this paper will henceforth use the term “choice-based” in relation to a teaching philosophy that looks to develop artistic behaviors through choice. Over the past half-century, philosophies about art education have shifted dramatically, especially as they relate to the value placed on creativity in art instruction (Seabolt, 2001; Zimmerman, 2010). During the Lowenfeld Era of the 1960s and 1970s, emphasis was placed on student self-expression and the development of creativity. A decade later, DBAE countered this self-expressive approach in favor of structured instruction of art disciplines, arguing that a well- rounded understanding of the arts comes when, “Students acquire knowledge of the subject matter or content of art, the concepts and generalizations that mark the discipline, and the 4 procedures or techniques used by competent professionals who devote their lives to art” - leaving out the development of student self-expression (Greer, 1984, p.