arkansas elementary art teachers' attitudes toward discipline-based art education and their...

ARKANSAS ELEMENTARY ART TEACHERS’ ATTITUDES TOWARD DISCIPLINE-BASED ART EDUCATION AND

THEIR IMPLEMENTATION OF THE STATE VISUAL ARTSSTANDARDS

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

ARKANSAS ELEMENTARY ART TEACHERS’ ATTITUDES TOWARD DISCIPLINE-BASED ART EDUCATION AND

THEIR IMPLEMENTATION OF THE STATE VISUAL ARTSSTANDARDS

A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment o f the requirements for the degree o f

Doctor o f Philosophy

By

MOHAMMAD M. A. ALDOSARI, B.S., M.S. King Saud University, 1995 University o f Dayton, 2003

December 2006 University o f Arkansas


UMI Number: 3273752

INFORMATION TO USERS

The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy

submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and

photographs, print bleed-through, substandard margins, and improper

alignment can adversely affect reproduction.

In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript

and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized

copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion.

®

UMIUMI Microform 3273752

Copyright 2007 by ProQuest Information and Learning Company.

All rights reserved. This microform edition is protected against

unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code.

ProQuest Information and Learning Company 300 North Zeeb Road

P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346


The purpose o f this study was to examine the Arkansas K-4 grade elementary art

teachers’ attitudes toward the four foundational disciplines of discipline-based art

education (DBAE), art making/studio art, art history, aesthetics, and art criticism, to

determine their acceptance o f the approach. Another purpose o f this study was to

examine the Arkansas K-4 grade elementary art teachers’ level o f implementation o f the

state’s three visual arts standards in the instruction. In Content Standard One K-4, the

students are expected to develop concepts and ideas through the processes o f inquiring,

exploring, and discovering a variety of references, such as historical, cultural, social,

environmental, and personal references. Content Standard Two K-4 aims to develop

students’ creativity skills by manipulating a wide variety of media, techniques, processes,

and tools to develop original works o f art and design. Finally, Content Standard Three

K-4 sets learning expectations through a process o f rediscovering and responding to

artworks and concepts o f self, o f others, o f environment, and of cultures. The study also

sought the factors that may influence the art teachers’ attitudes and implementation

means.

To answer the study’s questions, a 56-item survey questionnaire was developed.

Independent-sample t-tests, one-way ANOVA, and Tukey (HSD) post-hoc analysis tests

were conducted to analyze the collected data. The participants o f the study were 288 K-4

grade elementary art teachers.

Results o f the study revealed that the participants highly valued the importance o f

art making/studio art and art history. Aesthetics and art criticism had the lowest means of

attitudes. Statistical tests determined that having a degree in teaching art, confidence


level regarding the knowledge of each discipline, and job satisfaction had significant

effect on the participants’ attitudes toward the four foundational disciplines.

The study’s results also indicated a high level o f implementation of three visual

arts standards. Visual art standard two had the highest level o f implementation; then

visual art standard one came second, finally; visual art standard three had the lowest level

o f implementation. Factors such as, having a degree in teaching art, confidence level of

professional knowledge, and job satisfaction were found to be statistically significant

factors.


I hereby authorize the University of Arkansas Libraries to duplicate this dissertation when needed for research and/or scholarship.

Agreed / / ) y h a w im o i-r )

Refused


Acknowledgements

My most sincere gratefulness and thanks are due to God for the graces, guidance,

and support that he has given me through my life.

My deepest appreciation and gratitude go to my beloved father, mother, brothers,

and sisters for their continuous support. In addition, I would like to express my sincere

appreciation and thanks to my wife and children who did not spare any effort to prepare a

good family environment that greatly helped me throughout my graduate study.

My sincere gratitude is also due to my advisor and the chairman o f the

dissertation committee, Dr. Michael Wavering, for his support, expertise, and valuable

advice during the dissertation process.

I would like to express my deepest appreciation and gratitude to the research

committee, Dr. George Denney, Dr. Mounir Farah, and Dr. Angela LaPorte, for their

unlimited support and assistance in this dissertation and throughout my doctoral study.

Finally, I would like to thank all my friends who have supported me during my

study journey.

Mohammad

November 30, 2006

vi


TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACKNOW LEDGEMENTS................................................................................... vi

TABLE OF C O N T E N T S .................................................................................. vii

LIST OF C H A R T S ................................................................................................ ix

LIST OF T A B L E S ................................................................................................xi

CHAPTER 1: IN T R O D U C T IO N ......................................................................... 1

Purpose o f the Study . . . . . . . . 5Significance o f the Study . . . . . . . 6Statement o f the Problem . . . . . . . 6Research Questions . . . . . . . . 9Research Hypotheses . . . . . . . . 1 0Definition o f Terms . . . . . . . . 1 1Summary . . . . . . . . . 12

CHAPTER 2: REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE . . . . 1 4

The Twentieth Century Educational Movements and Studies that Contributed in developing the Status ofAmerican Art Education . . . . . . . 1 4

tViArt Education at the Opining o f the 20 Century . . . 1 4Art Education before World War II . . . . . 1 5Art Education after World War II . . . . . 1 7Discipline Oriented Art Education . . . . . 1 7

Discipline-Based Art Education (DBAE) Roots . . . . 1 8DBAE Definition and Development . . . . . 1 8Foundational Disciplines o f DBAE . . . . . 2 2How to Teach the DBAE Four Foundational Disciplines . . 26Evaluation of DBAE . . . . . . . 28

Arkansas State Visual Arts Standards . . . . . 3 0Arkansas State Teacher Accreditation . . . . . . 3 2

Competency Area . . . . . . . 3 3Summary . . . . . . . . . 34

CHAPTER 3: M E T H O D S ................................................................................... 36

Research Rationale . . . . . . . 3 6Participants . . . . . . . . . 36Procedures and Data Collection. . . . . . . 3 7Instrument . . . . . . . . . 38Variable List . . . . . . . . . 39

vii


Pilot Study . . . . . . . . . 42Measures . . . . . . . . . 43Reliability and Validity . . . . . . . . 43Data Analysis Procedures . . . . . . . 44Delimitation o f the Study . . . . . . . 45

CHAPTER 4: F I N D I N G S ................................................................................... 47

Pilot Study . . . . . . . . . 47Data Collection . . . . . . . . 48Elimination o f Record . . . . . . . 49Participants . . . . . . . . . 49Hypotheses Testing . . . . . . . . 5 6Summary . . . . . . . . . 1 1 0

CHAPTER 5: SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS . . . . 1 1 3

Summary of Findings . . . . . . . . 1 1 4Discussion . . . . . . . . . . 1 1 8Implications. . . . . . . . . . 1 2 9Limitations . . . . . . . . . . 1 3 1Recommendations . . . . . . . . 1 3 2Conclusions. . . . . . . . . . 133

R E F E R E N C E S ...........................................................................................................136

A P P E N D IX E S ...........................................................................................................140

A. Survey Cover Letter (Principal’s Letter) . . . . . 1 4 1B. Survey Cover Letter (Art Teacher’s Letter) . . . . 1 4 3C. The Survey . . . . . . . . 145D. The Arkansas State’s Visual Arts Frameworks K-4 Grades . . 1 5 3

viii


LIST OF CHARTS

Chart Title Page

1. A Distribution o f the Participants’ Mean o f Attitude toward the Importance o f Art Making Due totheir Professional Reading Level . . . . . . 64

2. A Distribution o f the Participants’ Mean o f Attitude toward the Importance o f Art History Due totheir Professional Reading Level . . . . . . 66

3. A Distribution o f the Participants’ Mean o f Attitude toward the Importance of Aesthetics Due totheir Professional Reading Level . . . . . . 6 8

4. A Distribution of the Participants’ Mean of Attitude toward the Importance o f Art Criticism Related totheir Professional Reading Level . . . . . 7 0

5. A Distribution o f the Participants’ Mean o f Attitude toward the Importance of Art Making Based on the Participants’ Art MakingConfidence Knowledge Level . . . . . . 72

6. A Distribution o f the Participants’ Mean o f Attitude toward the Importance of Art History Based on the Participants’ Art HistoryConfidence Knowledge Level . . . . . . 74

7. A Distribution o f the Participants’ Mean o f Attitude toward the Importance of Aesthetics Based on the Participants’ AestheticsConfidence Knowledge Level . . . . . . 7 6

8. A Distribution o f the Participants’ Mean o f Attitude toward the Importance of Art Criticism Related to the Participants’ Art CriticismConfidence Knowledge Level . . . . . . 7 8

9. A Distribution o f the Participants’ Mean o f Attitude toward the Importance o f Art Making Due to the Participants’Job Satisfaction Level . . . . . . 8 1

10. A Distribution of the Participants’ Mean o f Attitude toward the Importance o f Art History Due to the Participants’Job Satisfaction Level . . . . . . . 8 3


11. A Distribution o f the Participants’ Mean of Attitude toward the Importance o f Aesthetics Due to the Participants’Job Satisfaction Level .

12. A Distribution of the Participants’ Mean o f Attitude Toward the Importance of Art Criticism Related to The Participants’ Job Satisfaction Level .

13. A Distribution o f the Participants’ Mean o f State Visual Art Standard-One Based on TeachingArt Knowledge Confidence Level . . . .

14. A Distribution o f the Participants’ Mean o f State Visual Art Standard Two Based on TeachingArt Knowledge Confidence Level . . . .

15. A Distribution o f the Participants’ Mean o f State Visual Art Standard-Three Based on TeachingArt Knowledge Confidence Level . . . .

16. A Distribution o f the Participants’ Mean o f State Visual Art Standard One Based on theParticipants’ Job Satisfaction Level . . . .

17. A Distribution o f the Participants’ Mean o f State Visual Art Standard Two Based on theParticipants’ Job Satisfaction Level . . . .

18. A Distribution of the Participants’ Mean of State Visual Art Standard Three Based on theParticipants’ Job Satisfaction Level . . . .

x

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission

LIST OF TABELS

Table Title

1. Visual Arts Standards’ Reliability Coefficient .

2. The Participants Characteristics .

3. The participants’ knowledge and confidence and Job Satisfaction Level . . . . . .

4. Frequency and Percentage of Introducing and Preferring Taking a Course in Each Discipline o f DBAE . . . .

5. Frequency and Percentage of the Participants’ Attitude toward DBAE . . . . . . .

6. Independent Sample t test for Importance o f Art Making Based on Having a Degree in Teaching Art

7. Independent Sample t test for Importance o f Art History Based Having a Degree in Teaching Art

8. Independent Sample t test for Importance o f Aesthetics Based on Having a Degree in Teaching Art

9. Independent Sample t test for Importance o f Art Criticism Based on Having a Degree in Teaching Art

10. One-Way Analysis o f Variance for Importance of Art Making Due to Professional Reading Level . . . .

11. One-Way Analysis o f Variance for Importance o f Art History Due to Professional Reading Level . . . .

12. One-Way Analysis o f Variance for Importance of Aesthetics Due to Professional Reading Level . . . .

13. One-Way Analysis o f Variance for Importance o f Art Criticism Due to Professional Reading Level . . . .

14. One-Way Analysis o f Variance for Importance of Art Making Based on the Participants’ Confidence KnowledgeLevel o f Art Making . . . . . .

xi


15. One-Way Analysis o f Variance for Importance of Art History Based on the Participants’ Confidence KnowledgeLevel of Art History . . . . . . . 73

16. One-Way Analysis of Variance for Importance of Aesthetics Based on the Participants’ Confidence KnowledgeLevel o f Aesthetics . . . . . .

17. One-Way Analysis o f Variance for Importance of Art Criticism Based on the Participants’ Confidence Knowledge Levelof Art Criticism . . . . . . .

18. One-Way Analysis o f Variance for Importance of Art Making Due to the Participants’ Job Satisfaction Level .

19. One-Way Analysis o f Variance for Importance of Art History Due to the Participants’ Job Satisfaction Level .

20. One-Way Analysis o f Variance for Importance of Aesthetics Due to the Participants’ Job Satisfaction Level .

21. One-Way Analysis o f Variance for Importance of Art Criticism Due to the participants’ Job satisfaction Level .

22. Participants Overall Means o f Arkansas State Visual Arts Standards . . . . . . . .

23. Independent Sample t test for Standard One Implementation Mean Based on Having a Degree in Teaching Art

24. Independent Sample t test for Standard Two Implementation Mean Based on Having a Degree in Teaching Art

25. Independent Sample t test for Standard Three Implementation Mean Based on Having a Degree in Teaching Art

26. One-Way Analysis of Variance for Implementation o f Standard One Based on Teaching Art Knowledge Confidence Level .

27. One-Way Analysis o f Variance for Implementation of Standard Two Based on Teaching Art Knowledge Confidence Level . . . . . . .

xii

75

77

80

82

84

86

88

91

92

93

94

96


28. One-Way Analysis o f Variance for Implementation of Standard Three Based on Teaching Art Knowledge Confidence Level . . . . .

29. One-Way Analysis o f Variance for Implementation of Standard One based on the Participants’Job Satisfaction Level . . . .

30. One-Way Analysis o f Variance for Implementation of Standard Two Based on the Participants’Job Satisfaction Level . . . .

31. One-Way Analysis o f Variance for Implementation of Standard Three Due to the Participants’Job Satisfaction Level . . . .

xiii

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

In the late twentieth century, conferences and seminars held for evaluating

American education called for reforming and restructuring education in the United States.

One of those calls was the well-known report A Nation at Risk, written in 1983, that

criticized American public education for causing American students to fall behind in

competition with students of other countries. The knowledge of Japanese and German

students exceeded the students of the United States not only in industry and commerce

but also in high quality of learning, information, and intelligent skills. The report stated

that “the educational foundations of our society are presently being eroded by a rising

tide of mediocrity that threatens our very future as a Nation and people” (The U.S.

Department of Education, 1983, A nation at risk section, para.l).

The report provided examples that identified the educational dimensions of the

risks. One of those dimensions was the international comparisons of student achievement

that indicated that American students were never first or second on 19 academic tests and

were last 7 times. Another example was the high rates of illiteracy among adult and

teenage Americans. According to the simplest tests of everyday reading, writing, and

comprehension, there were 23 million functionally illiterate American adults. In

addition, about 13 percent of all 17-year-olds in the United State were considered

functionally illiterate. Finally, the high school students’ poor performance in most

standardized tests was another indication of the educational risks. It was found that the

students’ average achievement on most standardized tests was lower than it had been two

decades ago (The U.S. Department of Education, 1983, Indicators of Risk section).

1


The report called for focusing more on the educational subject content, claiming

that the teacher preparation curriculum focused more on courses in educational methods

at the expense of the subjects to be taught. The report ended with recommendations for

developing the quality of American education. Recommendations included making the

subject content more comprehensive and developing students’ skills in comprehension,

interpretation, and evaluation. The standardized tests were to be used in schools at

transition points from one level of schooling to another and from high school to

university and work. Lastly, teachers should meet high educational standards to

demonstrate and be prepared for teaching (The U.S. Department of Education, 1983,

Recommendations section).

The idea of comprehensive curriculum had emerged in art education in the 1960s.

Art education curriculum and frameworks were revised to define what students should

learn and experience in art. The seminars and conferences that evaluated art frameworks

in the 1960s recommended including other visual art areas such as art history, art

criticism, and aesthetics in art instruction because those disciplines help in providing a

comprehensive art knowledge and understanding (Duke, 1984). However, it was found

that the visual art teaching in the United States was concerned with art production over

such art disciplines. For instance, the seminar in Art Education for Research and

Curriculum Development held at the Pennsylvania State University in 1965

recommended a major curriculum reform that shifted the focus of education from

teaching facts to more comprehensive knowledge, understanding, and problem solving.

Art disciplines such as art history and criticism were to be included in art teaching

alongside studio study (Efland, 1984).

2


Putting the educational reco=mmendations and theories of the conferences and

reports into practice, The Getty Education Institute for the Arts in 1984 responded to the

need of comprehensive art knowledge and understanding by sponsoring a comprehensive

approach called discipline-based art education (DBAE). DBAE is a comprehensive

approach to instruction and learning in art with a sequentially organized written

curriculum consisting of lessons that draw their content from four foundational art

disciplines: (a) art making/studio art enabling students to use their artistic abilities to

develop artworks; (b) art criticism helping students to analyze, interpret, and evaluate

qualities of artworks; (c) art history providing students with knowledge and

understanding o f the role of art in society; (d) aesthetics helping students to understand

the nature and quality of art to be able to make and justify judgments about it (Dobbs,

1992).

DBAE presents art education in the way of other academic subjects’ mode or

design, in terms of written lessons and learning activities for each grade level in a

systematic, coherent, and sequential way. The written curriculum in DBAE aims also to

ensure that the learner move from one grade level to another with appropriate learning

that builds on overall goals of skills, knowledge, and understanding (Dobbs, 1998).

Ways o f implementing the DBAE approach in art instruction have been clarified in the

Getty Education Institute for the Arts’ publications making the learning objectives in the

art classrooms planned and assessable (McLaughlin & Thomas, 1984).

Evaluations o f the schools that applied the DBAE approach indicated

improvement in the quality of art teaching and learning, which appeared on the students’

performance in the art classroom. In those schools, students are involved in active

3


discussions of ideas, subjects, styles, and qualities of artworks. In addition, the influence

of artists’ works appears in the students’ works, which are exhibited with the students’

critical and historical reflections. Art teachers who teach at schools that applied DBAE

approach became active members involved in school planning (Wilson, 1997).

Moreover, the teachers who have been oriented about the DBAE indicated that they could

teach art in important ways and they assisted other teachers to teach effectively

(Silverman, 1989).

The national visual art standards require art programs to teach more art

disciplines. The National Standards for Arts Education development by the Consortium

of National Arts Education Associations, published in 1994, established content and

achievement expectations for K-12 students considering aesthetics, history, creativity,

and performance as basic curriculum content in visual arts (Dreeszen, Craig, & Comp,

2001). The Arkansas frameworks for curriculum guidelines increasingly require

exposure and experiences in the various art disciplines such as art history, aesthetics, and

art criticism. Hence, DBAE content fits with most visual art standards because these

comprehensive approaches have much in common with DBAE (Dobbs, 1992). DBAE

evolution was greatly influenced by the state frameworks which were in favor o f a

comprehensive, multifaceted approach to art. DBAE, in turn, has influenced and changed

frameworks in many states. Therefore, the relationship between DBAE and state visual

arts frameworks is reciprocal or mutual (Dobbs, 1998).

The student learning expectations in Arkansas state visual arts standards for K-4

grades “are specific to what all students in those grades should know and be able to do in

visual art during that span of years” (Arkansas Department of Education, 2001, Fine Arts

4


Curriculum Framework section). There are three visual arts standards for K-4 grade in

Arkansas. Standard One aims to develop the students’ inquiry and discovery skills

regarding their surrounding cultural, social, and historical environments to develop their

own ideas and concepts. Standard Two has objectives regarding the students’ creative

skills, expecting students to use their creativity “in a wide variety o f media, techniques,

processes, and tools to develop original works of art and design.” Standard Three expects

students to “reflect upon, respond to, and rediscover the art work and concept of self, of

others (past and present), of environments, and of diverse cultures” (Arkansas

Department of Education, 2001, Fine Arts Curriculum Framework section).

Purpose of the Study

The purpose of this study was to examine Arkansas State K-4 grade elementary

art teachers’ attitudes and knowledge about the discipline-based art education approach

(DBAE) to determine its applicability to AR elementary schools. According to Greer

(1984), teachers’ acceptance of DBAE and realization of its importance are indications of

its successful implementation in schools. This study also attempted to determine if there

were factors that influenced art teachers’ attitudes toward DBAE. The examined factors

were art teachers educational level, whether or not the art teacher had a degree in

teaching art, the art teachers’ professional reading level, the art teachers’ confidence

knowledge level of each art discipline, and the art teachers’ job satisfaction level.

In addition, this study was to examine Arkansas elementary art teachers’

implementation of the state visual arts standards in their lesson instructions and to

provide additional important objectives to be added to the arts standards. This study also

attempted to determine the significant differences in the mean of standards’

5


implementation in the art teachers’ lesson instructions based on five independent factors.

The examined factors were the art teachers’ years of teaching experience, educational

degree, whether the art teachers have degrees in teaching art, self-efficacy regarding their

knowledge of the art subject, and their satisfaction of being art teachers. The level of

contribution of each variable was determined.

Significance of the Study

This study examined Arkansas elementary art teachers’ attitudes toward the

discipline-based art education (DBAE) approach. Investigating teachers’ attitudes toward

DBAE is a factor of its successful implementation to find out to what extent they accept

this approach (Greer, 1984). Therefore, this study attempted to provide Arkansas

elementary art teachers’ level of acceptance of DBAE, which may be used when planning

to use the DBAE approach in the state’s elementary schools. In addition, this study

aimed to provide statistical data about the status of the visual arts standards

implementation in Arkansas elementary schools, which may be used as a reference for

the state’s department of education and districts. As will be clarified later in the

literature, the Arkansas visual arts standards were examined in the year 1986 by Teague

in a doctoral dissertation titled “An assessment o f Arkansas middle school/junior high

school art programs using art education association standards therefore this study may

update the data on teachers’ views concerning these standards.

Statement of the Problem

Since the last quarter of the 20th century there have been calls for providing K-12

students with a comprehensive art curriculum that adequately serves students’ knowledge

6


and understanding about visual arts by going beyond the production of the art objects to

the artistic forms, historical and cultural background, and critical and aesthetic aspects of

the art objects. Ralph Smith in 1966 supported the idea of a synthesis o f comprehensive

art discipline writing about aesthetics, art history, artistic creation, and art criticism

(Dobbs, 1998). In addition, the seminar in Art Education for Research and Curriculum

Development held at the Pennsylvania State University in 1965 and A Nation at Risk

report in 1983 supported such a curriculum. Moreover, the State’s visual arts

frameworks have adopted more comprehensive art disciplines such as, aesthetics, history,

creation, and performance as basic curriculum content in visual arts. Because there is no

written art curriculum, art units and learning activities are selected by the class teachers,

according to their preference, which will not ensure the scope and sequence plan

(DiBlasio, 1987). Discipline- based art education (DBAE) is a comprehensive art

approach based on four art disciplines, art-making/studio art, art history, art criticism, and

aesthetics, which all together could be applied in teaching art in a comprehensive way.

With its written curriculum and exemplary lessons, DBAE makes learning a continuous,

systematic, and sequential process having specific educational objectives for each grade

level, according to the students’ appropriate age and ability.

The literature indicated that schools that applied DBAE showed improvement in

their art programs and art teachers became active members involving in school planning.

According to Wilson (1997):

Evaluators found that schools that once had weak visual arts programs have since developed strong ones. In other schools, visual arts programs have moved from their customary place at the margins of the school curriculum to its core. Art teachers who were accustomed to working by themselves are now working as key members of school planning teams with the intent on broadening school instruction programs.

7


And principals are using DBAE initiatives to organize entire elementary school curriculum, (p. 11)

In his study “The effects o f modified discipline-based art instruction on

mainstreamed students' attitudes, achievement and classroom performance in a public

school system”, Gray (1992) concluded that discipline-based art education enhanced the

mainstreamed students’ understanding, making, approaching, and evaluation of art. In

another study, Severance (2005) used critical-thinking skills and DBAE theory to teach

parents and fifth grade students in designing an art museum show focusing on art careers.

Severance confirmed that:

We incorporate critical-thinking skills and use discipline-based art education (DBAE) theory. These components enable our art programs to present art as it fits in with all other academic areas and our culture. We now do a better job explaining why art is important. These improvements can be furthered with the following generational activities, (p. 24)

Arkansas State elementary schools depend on the state visual arts framework to

guide teaching art. The Arkansas visual arts standards include disciplines such as, art

production, art history, and aesthetics. This study attempted to examine Arkansas

elementary art teachers’ knowledge and attitudes toward the four foundational disciplines

of DBAE, art production/ studio art, art history, art criticism, and aesthetics to examine

their acceptance o f the DBAE approach.

The literature did not indicate a recent evaluation of Arkansas elementary

teachers’ implementation of the state visual arts standards. There are studies that

evaluated Arkansas schools’ art programs regarding their implementation of the National

Art Education Association standards, which were used in the schools before the year

1987 when Arkansas developed its visual arts standards. Stafford (1985) indicated that

Arkansas high school art programs met 61% of the National Art Education Association

8


standards. The schools in Central regions o f the state had the highest percentage of

meeting the standards, while the schools in the Southeast regions of the state had the

lowest. Teague (1986) in his study that evaluated Arkansas middle school art programs

concluded that Arkansas schools met 55% of National Art Education Association

standards and that the most art programs were studio-based.

The second major objective of this study was examining to what extent Arkansas

elementary art teachers implement the state visual arts standards content in their teaching

and what additional objectives they think are important to be added to the standards.

Research Questions

This study addressed two major research questions with associated sub- questions:

1) What were the Arkansas K-4 grade elementary art teachers’ attitudes toward the

four discipline foundations of discipline- based art education (DBAE): art

making/ studio art, art history, aesthetics, and art criticism?

❖ Were there differences between Arkansas elementary art teachers’ attitudes

toward each foundational art discipline o f DBAE based on the following

independent variables:

• Education degree

• Having degree in teaching art

• Level of professional reading

• Level of confidence regarding their knowledge of art making/studio

art, art history, art criticism, and aesthetics

• Level of job satisfaction

9


2) To what extent do Arkansas K-4 grade elementary art teachers implement the

State visual arts standards in their instructions?

❖ Were there differences between Arkansas elementary art teachers’

implementation of the state visual arts standards based on the following


• Year of teaching experience

• Education level

• Whether they have degrees in teaching art

• Self-efficacy of their knowledge about teaching art


Research Hypotheses

It was hypothesized that there were differences between Arkansas art teachers’

attitudes toward the discipline- based art education (DBAE) based on the following




• Level of professional reading

• Level of confidence regarding their knowledge of art making/studio art, art

history, art criticism, and aesthetics

• Level o f job satisfaction

10


In addition, this research study hypothesized that there were differences between

Arkansas art teachers’ implementation of the State visual art standards in their instruction

due to the following independent variables:

• Year of teaching experience

• Educational degree


• Self-efficacy of their knowledge about teaching art


Definitions of Terms

• Aesthetics: refers to a scanning process that “helps students learn to evaluate the

basis upon which to make informed judgments about art” (Dobbs, 1992, p. 75).

• Arkansas State Visual Arts Standards: these are the three standards that set

expectations of what K-12 grade students will learn in Arkansas art classes.

• Art criticism: “Entails describing, interpreting, evaluating, and theorizing about

works of art for the purpose of increasing understanding and appreciation o f art

and its role in society... there fore, art criticism includes the use of language,

thoughtful writing, and talk about art through which we can better understand and

appreciate art, artists, audiences, and the roles o f art in culture and society”

(Dobbs, 1998, p. 32).

• Art History: refers to teaching students about the art objects’ historical, social, and

cultural contexts (Dobbs, 1992).

11


• Art making/ studio art: “The process o f responding to observations, ideas,

feelings, and other experiences by creating works of art through the skillful,

thoughtful, and imaginative application of the tools and techniques to various

media” (Dobbs, 1998, p. 27).

• Attitude: Is the degree to which a person likes or dislikes an object (Ajzen &

Fishbein, 1980).

• Discipline- based art education (DBAE): is a comprehensive approach to

instruction and learning in art with a written and sequential organized curriculum

consisting of lessons drawing their content from four foundational art disciplines:

art making/studio art, art history, art criticism, and aesthetics (Dobbs, 1992).

• Foundational disciplines: are art making/studio art, art history, art criticism, and

aesthetics that form the DBAE content.

• Job satisfaction: “a pleasure or positive emotional state resulting from the

appraisal of one’s job or job experience” (Locke, 1976, p. 1304).

• Self-efficacy: “Is the judgment of one’s capability to organize and execute the

courses of action required to produce given attainment” (Bandura, 1997, p.3).

Summary

Educational conferences and reports recommended comprehensive art curriculum

that provide students with adequate knowledge and skills. Discipline-based art education

(DBAE) was developed in 1984 to provide such curriculum. DBAE is a comprehensive

art approach supported with a sequentially organized written curriculum consisting of

four foundational art disciplines: art making, art history, aesthetics, and art criticism.

12


DBAE content does not contradict the states’ visual arts frameworks because they have

objectives that serve the four foundational art disciplines.

This study was designed to examine Arkansas K-4 grade elementary art teachers’

attitude toward the DBAE foundational art disciplines as well as to determine the extent

to which Arkansas K-4 grade art teachers implemented the state visual art standards.

13


CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

This chapter provides the review o f the literature related to this study. It starts

with a historical background including the major educational reform movements and

studies in the 20th century that contributed to creating the current visual arts curriculum in

the United States. It also provides an overview of DBAE regarding its roots,

development, content, as well as its current status in states and educational districts that

apply DBAE in their schools. This chapter concludes with an explanation of the content

o f the Arkansas State Visual Arts Frameworks K-4 grades and art teachers’ certification.

The 20th Century Educational Movements and Studies that Contributed

in developing the Status of American Art Education

Art Education at the Opening o f the 20th Century

At the beginning of the 20th century, the purpose of teaching art was for

appreciation and creativity (Kern, 1987). The emphasis on drawing instructions related

to craft and industrial purposes that characterized art education in the United States

started to shift to teaching more inclusive education, such as appreciation, design, and

crafts. This was a sign of a split between art education and vocational education that

greatly influenced art education’s practices during the industrial revolution in the 19th

century (Efland, 1990).

The 1927 Cleveland Board of Education’s report stated that teaching art in school

was for appreciation values:

14


Art like music is taught with an eye to its appreciation values. Observation and experience show that he who has tried to create beauty gains from the experience a livelier appreciation of the works o f others. For this reason drawing is generally taught throughout the school system. (Efland, 1983, p. 39)

Art education broadened its educational goals to include goals such as solving

problems of living related to the individual, which started to replace realization and

appreciation of beauty in art as the purpose of art education. Art education was to help

individuals understand their lives and communicate with others through cooperative

activities. Hopkins and Burnett (1936) confirmed that the purpose of art education:

Is to aid the individual to improve his daily living by helping him to discover in it more and varied insights, deeper feeling, and broader understandings. This means beginning with the individual where he is in his thinking, desiring, and appreciating, and working with him in the realization of his purposes, (p. 13)

Another purpose of art education serves the field of social attitudes and abilities

o f the individual. “An individual who has little communication with other individuals

lives a poor life.... But with increased contacts comes the necessity to leam how to work

together, to cooperate toward common ends.” (Hopkins & Burnett, 1936, p. 14)

Art Education before World War II (1930s)

Art teaching was affected by the child psychology studies in the late 19th and

beginning of 20th centuries. Child drawing studies found that children’s drawing abilities

depended on a process of lawful development, which initiated calls for investigating the

traditional art teaching methods; and new methods of teaching art soon appeared. Earl

Bames (1903) in two volumes of articles explained the findings of his studies that

involved a large number o f school boys and girls. He analyzed the children’s minds and

thinking by studying their drawing. His articles included studies of the pictorial

evaluation of a man, children’s attitudes toward problems of perspective, analysis of the

15


illustration of stories made by children, and evidences of the quality difference of the

children’s thinking driven from drawings. Results of Barnes’s studies described

children’s drawings and indicated that children preferred symbolic drawing rather than

representing objects as they appear.

As a result of these studies, more attention to learners’ interests and needs as well

as connecting art activities to the learner’s daily life characterized art teaching in the

1930s. According to Gearhart (1938), art education:

Develops the child’s use and awareness of art in his daily life.... The emphasis on art is on its contribution to the child’s well-balanced outlet in work as well as in play. Opportunity is offered for varied experience based on child’s interests and needs, (p. 38)

Art education in school became a subject consisting of units of instructions with

lessons that relate to other educational subjects in the school curriculum such as history,

geography, science, languages, mathematics, industrial arts, social studies, and music.

Leon Winslow (1939) in his book The Integrated School Art Program advocated

integrating art in the curriculum to serve a broadly cultural education along with the

humanities and natural science in elementary and secondary school programs. Winslow

insisted on integrating art as a general rather than a special subject in the school program.

For art instruction, he recommended that the subject of art consists of unit instructions

and each unit consists of correlated lessons that serve the unit subject. The unit should

include general information derived from the subjects o f the curriculum, such as history,

geography, science, and music, and technical information derived from the subject matter

or what we call today art elements, such as line, mass, and color, as well as structural

principle of design with construction, rhythm, harmony, and balance (Winslow, 1939).

16


In the 1930s the importance of art appreciation, which had been considered as an

important purpose of teaching art in the teens and twenties, started to decline. It was

replaced with self-expression and its use in everyday living (Efland, 1983).

Art education after World War II

After 1945, art education emphasized the child’s development and individuality

as central issues. This was in part a result of theorists’ educational thoughts, such as

Viktor Lowenfeld who advocated free expression as a vital way for the child’s healthy

growth and development. In his book “Creative and Mental Growth” Lowenfeld

successfully provided descriptions for the child developmental basis helping in

understanding the child’s art. He clearly described these stages and provided examples of

children’s drawings and paintings. In addition, he suggested appropriate art activities for

every developmental stage. In addition, he provided different educational purposes, such

as child development, individual development, aspects o f growth, and developmental

stages, which should be taken into consideration when designing classroom and school

exhibits (Lownefeld, 1957).

Discipline Oriented Art Education

The definition of discipline derived from the sciences means having an organized

body of knowledge, specific methods of inquiry, and a community o f scholars who

generally agree on the fundamental ideas of their field (Efland, 1990). In 1960, the

psychologist Jerome Bruner argued that the content of any subject could be taught to

students at any age when defining the appropriate structure of the discipline and

presenting its principles in a form that fits and appeals to the students (Stankiewicz,

2000). Bruner argued that the adult practitioners in every particular field should be used

17


as models for students, “the students should be introduced to the ways of thinking, the

concepts, and the typical activities of the adult in a particular field” (Smith, 1996, p. 208).

Bruner’s philosophy was introduced to art education in 1962 in the Arts and

Humanities Program that funded 17 conferences on arts to form a discipline oriented art

education curriculum. There was an agreement that art is a discipline that has its own

structure and goals that should be to help engage in disciplined inquiry in art. After these

conferences, there was a movement to create a discipline oriented art education. As a

result o f that movement, the focus in art education shifted from self-expression to a focus

on the discipline and what should be taught (Efland, 1990).

Discipline-Based Art Education (DBAE)

Discipline-Based Art Education’s Definition and Development

In the 1980s there were calls for improving the quality and status of education.

The well-known report “A Nation at Risk” in 1983 that warned that American public

schools do poorly and that American students are falling behind compared to students of

other countries (Delacruz & Dunn, 1996). The report indicated that “Our once

unchallenged preeminence in commerce, industry, science, and technological innovation

is being overtaken by competitors throughout the world” (The U.S. Department of

Education, 1983, A Nation at Risk section, para. 1). In 1984, the Getty Center for

Education in the Arts, now called the Getty Education Institute for the Arts, sponsored a

comprehensive approach called Discipline-based art education (DBAE) derived from

four art disciplines: art production, art history, art criticism, and aesthetic (Dobbs, 1998).

DBAE aimed to provide students with a comprehensive understanding of art

beyond the making of art and utilitarian purposes that characterized the teaching of art.

18


According to Dobbs (1998), “comprehensive approach to art education is markedly

different from the approach taken in most U.S. schools for most o f the twentieth

century.” (p. 17). He added, since its appearance, art in school curriculum “followed the

predictable path o f utilitarian necessity” and he gives examples:

In the nineteenth century the evolution o f the American work ethic placed a premium on drawing skills, whether for the purpose of acquiring job skills to work in a factory, to sketch portraits, or simply to encourage good penmanship and hand-eye coordination, (p. 17)

The term discipline-based art education first appeared in 1984 in an article by

Dwain Greer. In his article Discipline-Based Arts Education: Approaching Art as a

Subject Study, Greer (1984) stated that “I have simply provided an identifying label for

an approach to teaching art: I call it discipline-based art education”, (p. 212). However,

the DBAE seeds had been in the field of education decades before. According to Duke

(1988):

The idea of DBAE was first developed during the 1960s by a group of leading art educators, including Manuel Barkan of Ohio State University and Elliot Eisner of Stanford University. But theory had not been completely developed or integrated with actual practice in the classroom, (p. 8)

The ideas and philosophies that formed DBAE existed in the field and were

tViactively discussed in the literature throughout the last quarter of the 20 century (Dobbs,

1998). Jerome Bruner called for a major curriculum reform that shifted focus of

education from teaching facts to understanding and problem solving (Efland, 1990).

Bruner’s philosophy was introduced to art education by Barkan, who believed that the art

curriculum should help students to have art experiences related to art criticism and art

history by exposing the students to a wide range of art activities. He claimed that these

experiences and knowledge are vital for students’ creation and understanding of art.

19


Barkan’s ideas were discussed in a conference held at Pennsylvania State University

indicating that schools should provide students with a wide range of art activities (Dobbs,

1997, p. 19). In 1965, the seminar in Art Education for Research and Curriculum

Development held at the Pennsylvania State University recommended that art disciplines

such as art history and criticism should be included in art teaching as well as studio study

(Efland, 1984).

In 1966, Ralph Smith called for a synthesis of the discipline and child-centered

conception o f art education writing about aesthetics, art history, artistic creation, and art

criticism, and finally established the Journal o f Aesthetic Education encouraging a

comprehensive view of arts education. In the same time, research studies and articles

were investigating and discussing the students’ perception, talk about art, responses to

artworks, and other subjects about the consequences of curriculum (Dobbs, 1998).

In the early 1980s, there was a trend to reform the old state curriculum

frameworks encouraging comprehensive approaches. The Southwest Regional

Laboratory (SWRL) in Los Angeles developed an art program for the elementary grades

including content and visual resources focusing on art production, art history, and art

criticism. The trend of a comprehensive art approach was adopted by the National Art

Education Association’s “Quality Goals Statement” that required a comprehensive

modification in conceptions of art education goals, learners, teacher training, instructional

resources, and other aspects of art curriculum. Then, books and articles were published

in response to the need for comprehensive art education. In addition, textbooks and a

variety of instructional resources and materials designed according to the elements of the

approach started to appear in the market to be used by art teachers in schools. Although

20


these commercial products supported the comprehensive art approach, it was not enough

for the needs of art specialists and general classroom teachers. Finally, the professional

effort to develop a comprehensive art approach was provided by the Getty Education

Institute for the Arts outlining its view in a publication titled Beyond Creating: the Place

fo r Art in Am erica’s Schools in 1984 reinforcing the concept of discipline-oriented art

curriculum and later developed by Gilbert Clark, Michael Day, and Dwaine Greer to

discipline-based art education, providing a comprehensive art approach derived from four

disciplines: art-making, art history, art criticism, and aesthetics (Dobbs, 1997).

According to Leilani Duke (1984):

The Getty Center for Education in the Arts did a year long examination o f public schools’ visual arts programs finding that those programs characterized with emphasis on art production excluded teaching about the cultural and historical contributions o f art or how to value, analyze, and interpret works of art. Another finding was the absence of written, sequential, and substantive curricula that produce the content and process of art and provide for cumulative learning. (McLaughlin & Thomas, 1984, pp. iii-iv)

Therefore, DBAE was developed to provide students with comprehensive art

knowledge and understanding. Eisner (2002) indicated that DBAE aims to help students

acquire high-quality arts performance by developing the students’ skills and imagination

needed for enhancing their ability to talk about the qualities of the art and their

understanding about the historical and cultural context in which art is created.

Discipline-based art education is not a curriculum rather it is a comprehensive

approach. According to Elliot Eisner “because DBAE is not a curriculum, conceptual

clarity about its aims, components, and their meaning is particularly important.” (Dobbs,

1998, p. x). Dobbs (1998) indicated that DBAE:

Is not a curriculum in the sense of being a stipulated series of learning arranged in a prescribed manner. Rather, it is a conceptual framework or set of principles and an

21


approach to teaching and learning in art based upon disciplines that contribute to the making and understanding of art. (p. 6)

In addition, Young and Adams (1991) describe DBAE as “unifying approach or

concept rather than as a narrowly prescribed curriculum or specific method of teaching”

(p. 99).

Foundational Disciplines o f DBAE

The content of DBAE consists of four foundational disciplines or areas. The

discipline as defined by Wilson (1997) is a field of study that has a recognized body of

knowledge or content, a community of professionals who study the discipline and a set of

characteristic procedures and behaviors that facilitate exploration and inquiry. According

to Dobbs (1992), discipline-based art education (DBAE) is a comprehensive approach to

instruction and learning in art with a written and sequentially organized curriculum

consisting of lessons drawing their content from four foundational art disciplines: art

production enabling students to use their abilities to develop artworks; art criticism

helping students to analyze, interpret, and evaluate qualities of artworks; art history

providing students with knowledge and understanding of the role of art in society;

aesthetics helping students to understand the nature and quality of art to be able to make

and justify judgments about it.

Art making

Art making is using tools and techniques in skillful and imaginative ways in

response to ideas, feelings, and observations to create artistic objects (Dobbs, 1998). By

making art, students can explore and experience many aspects including:

o Applying a wide range of art materials, tools, equipment, and techniques and

becoming familiar with them

22


o Learning about tradition of craftsmanship and developing respect and utilitarian

ways of materials

o Learning attitudes and feelings of artists toward their work

o Acquiring the personal qualities and skills required for successful artistry, such as

persistence, patience, and self-criticism

o Learning artistic techniques and solutions to express ideas and feelings in visual

form

o Understanding the motivations and attitudes of artists by learning their lives and

appreciating their contribution to the society

o Appreciating the cultural histories from which the artists draw ideas and

inspiration to create their works. (Dobbs, 1992, pp. 71-72)

Art history

Art history provides students with knowledge about the art objects’ historical,

social, and cultural contexts helping the students to understand the historical order o f the

art movements and stylistic traditions (Dobbs, 1998). The study of art history is

important for students to understand and appreciate art and to make connections between

artworks from different historical eras. Eisner (1965) stated that adults who had not been

introduced to art history in their school education found it difficult to appreciate

contemporary art, found it difficult to discuss artworks they saw in art exhibits, and could

not relate the new artworks with the artworks of the past.

Aesthetics

In DBAE, aesthetics is a scanning that focuses on the visual appearance of works

of art. Aesthetics, therefore, could be a tool that initiates the process of art criticism. It

23


helps students learn and evaluate the basis upon which to make judgments about art.

Aesthetics seeks answers for the definition of art, beauty, and how to support or justify

judgments about art (Dobbs, 1992).

“Aesthetic scanning” is a method developed by Harry Broudy to help students

understand art and Dwaine Greer used it in teaching aesthetics in DBAE (Erickson,

1986). It is a scanning process that focuses on the visual appearance of works of art.

Aesthetics, therefore, could be a tool that initiates the process of art criticism.

According to Dobbs (1992), aesthetics helps students learn and evaluate the basis

upon which to make judgments about art. It seeks answers for the definition of art,

beauty, how to support or justify judgments about art. Aesthetics scanning helps the

learner to visually see what is in works of art in four properties. First are the sensory

properties that help learners identify the visual elements of the works of art including

lines, shapes, values, textures, colors, and spaces. Second are the formal properties or art

principles that describes how the work of art elements are organized, how they work

together to shape the whole work and express ideas, the repetition and emphasis of

elements that characterize the work, and how the elements are distributed in the work.

Third are the technical properties that identify the tools, equipment, and art techniques

the artist used to make the work. Fourth are expressive properties that discuss the

expressive characteristics of the work and how it sounds. Students learn that the

elements of the work of art give a variety of feelings. For example, wavy lines and blue

color give a feeling of relaxation (Dobbs, 1992).

Smith (2002) developed four phases of aesthetics learning according to the

student’s school grade. The first phase starts from kindergarten to the 3rd grade during

24


which “the teachers try to develop an elementary sense of art and exploit the well-known

propensity of young children to delight in the sensory and dramatic qualities of things”

(p. 13). The second phase starts when the student from 4th to 6th grade during which

“Aesthetic instruction becomes more narrowly focused. The emphasis is on perceiving a

work’s conventional manifold o f properties, for example, subject, form, content,

expressiveness, and style” (p. 14). The third phase of learning aesthetics starts when the

student is in grades 7 to 9 in which learning aesthetics “incorporates and builds upon the

phases o f exposure, familiarization, and perceptual training” (p. 14 ). Smith indicated

that students in this phase develop the ability of connecting art with the stream of time.

The fourth phase starts when the student is in grades 10-12 during which the student can

“cultivate an appreciation of the qualities of masterworks and ultimately to formulate a

rudimentary philosophy of art” (p. 14).

Art criticism

Art criticism means description, analysis, interpreting, and evaluating o f works of

art for the purpose of understanding and appreciation of art. Art criticism seeks answers

for the works of art’s perception and description, what they mean through analysis and

interpretation, and finally, what their worth and value is through judgment. Through art

criticism, students are involved in a process of comparing and contrasting works to one

another, and considering the social and cultural contexts in which the works were

produced (Dobbs, 1992).

Art criticism, according to Feldman (1970), is “more or less informed organized

talk about art” (p. 50). Stinespring (1992) confirmed that:

Art criticism can be used to illustrate the problems presented by the DBAE concept, which is based on the assumption that there are disciplines with methodologies that

25


can be reasonably defined and that are conducted by clearly credentialed professionals who serve as role models, (p. 21)

According to Eisner (1987), teaching art criticism in the classroom should include

discussion about the artwork in terms of the way the forms are organized, the feelings

derived from the images, and making comparisons between the artworks.

How to Teach the DBAE Four Content Discipline Foundations

There is no certain proportion of instructional time devoted to each one of the

DBAE four art disciplines. Dobbs (1998) stated that:

The proportions of instructional time and attention allocated to the individual art disciplines may vary with the nature and scope of the individual lesson and local circumstance, such as the training and interests of the teachers, or availability of resources such as art reproductions or an art museum in the community, (p. 82)

Although there is no time proportion formula for each discipline, the lesson

should be “balanced to reflect the multiple interests involved, that alternative perspectives

be available, and that a variety of resources might be utilized” (Dobbs, 2004, p. 707). In

addition, Greer (1984) confirmed that “discipline-based instruction also reflects balanced

attention to all four components of the discipline of art, which reinforce one another as

they are taught concurrently” (p. 217).

DBAE aimed to “formalize art education so it conforms to the curricular mode of

other school subjects” (Swanger, 1990, p. 437). One of DBAE features is that it has

written lessons that plan the learning activities for each grade level. The written lessons

avoid learning redundancy and ensure that students acquire new art knowledge and skills

in each grade level. According to Dobbs (1992):

New teachers are apprised by a written DBAE curriculum as to what is required in the district and what students have previously experienced. Another way to make the point is to remember that we want students to have twelve years o f art education, not one year of art education twelve times, (p. 23)

26


The Getty Education Institute for the Arts published lesson examples to describe

ways o f implementing the discipline-based art education approach in art instruction

helping art teachers to pursue new ideas and evaluate their lessons’ objectives.

By describing program objectives and clear goals for practice, a written curriculum provides the structure necessary for confident pursuit of new ideas and strategies. A written curriculum also creates a surer basis for evaluation, which is important for both curricular accountability and program development. Unless strategies and objectives are clearly stated and understood, it is difficult to assess how well they have been realized or to identify areas for improvement. (McLaughlin & Thomas, 1984, p. 6)

Stephen Dobbs (2004) stated that DBAE considers art like other academic

subjects in terms o f the need for a written, sequential curriculum that helps students move

from one grade-level to another with age-appropriate learning tracks and reinforced

lessons, without repetition, incrementally building the overall goals including the skills,

knowledge, and understandings.

In DBAE, the four foundational disciplines are equally valued (Dobbs, 1998).

Through exploring these disciplines, students study visual arts in a coherent and

consequential way and know and understand art from different sources.

The four content areas of discipline based art education are important for a

complete understanding of art, including its historical and cultural contexts, which help

students to interpret and analyze works of art. According to McLaughlin and Thomas

(1984):

The inclusion of these four content areas in art instruction is important because each develops knowledge and skills that contribute importantly not only to children’s more complete understanding of art, but to their ability to draw facts and inferences about the cultural and historical contexts from which the arts spring and analyze and interpret the powerful ideas that the arts communicate, (p. iv)

27


DBAE Evaluation

According to Wilson (1997), between 1988 and 1994 evaluators visited more than

100 elementary schools that implemented DBAE. He indicated that it was obvious that

DBAE art programs were successful. Wilson confirmed that, “The evaluators could tell

within a few minutes of their arrival whether or not they were at a DBAE elementary

school” (p. 140).

Wilson (1997) stated that the walls o f the DBAE elementary schools and

classrooms displayed many students’ works of art that showed the influence of artist

works. In the art classroom, students studied and discussed ideas, subjects, styles, and

the quality of artworks. The students’ exhibitions were accompanied with students’

critical and historical writing about artists’ work and their works showing the relationship

and connection between their works and the artists’.

Art teachers worked cooperatively and communicated with people from other

fields such as museum educators, artists, art critics and professors, which reflected the

quality of education they provided to their students. Wilson indicated that the art teacher

working with other fields’ members, “Together they have planned programs that have

symbolically removed classroom walls, virtually bringing the art world into classrooms.

At the same time students have gone into the art world to receive an authentic education

in the arts.” (Wilson, 1997, p. 11)

In a study titled “Attitude toward andfrequency o f use o f discipline-based art

education among John Paul Getty Institute trained educators”, Triche (2004) examined

teachers who trained in the John Paul Getty Institute regarding their attitudes toward and

frequency of use o f DBAE. The study revealed that the teachers were motivated and

28


confident in their ability to provide art instruction to students. The teachers who have

been oriented about DBAE indicated that they could teach art better and also helped other

teachers to teach effectively. Dwaine and Silverman (1988) evaluated elementary

teachers’ implementation of DBAE in their schools after they attended a summer

professional development program at the Getty Institute for arts. Dwaine and Silverman

(1988) concluded that “when classroom teachers have a comprehensive curriculum to

guide their efforts, they can teach the arts more effectively. Furthermore, the more in

service a teacher receives, the more effectively he or she teaches a discipline-based

perspective.” (p 14)

Students in DBAE classes engage in art making activities and make connections

between the art objects and human cultural heritage. These learning activities “contribute

to developing both perceptual and cognitive skills. Studying art comprehensively also

contributes significantly to building the storehouse of images and concepts which make

all experience meaningful” (Silverman, 1989, p. 54). Finally, Dobbs (1998) stated that

“DBAE has made significant strides in the 1980s and 1990s toward achieving the more

significant role for art in schooling for which so many of its practitioners have always

hoped.” (p. 120)

DBAE considers art like other academic subjects in terms o f the need for a

sequential written curriculum that helps students move from one grade-level to another

with age-appropriate learning tracks and reinforced lessons (Dobbs, 2004). DBAE

insures the continuity of art learning in a systematic and sequential art instruction

maintaining a formalized written curriculum having specific educational objectives.

Teachers who select art units and learning activities according to their preference will not

29


ensure the scope and sequence plan (DiBlasio, 1987). In addition, DBAE provides

specific art knowledge, concepts, and techniques that make it possible for teachers to

evaluate the outcomes of what is being taught (Greer, 1986).

Eisner confirmed that DBAE is based on facts and theories about the ways

children learn what should be learned, and how lesson instruction can be organized

(Black, 1996). DBAE aimed to “formalize art education so it conforms to the curricular

mode of other school subjects” (Swanger, 1990, p. 437). Dobbs (1998) stated that the

lessons of DBAE written curriculum are to have a clear statement of learning ideas and

behaviors that the lessons focus on, descriptions of the significance of learning, basic

questions, and alternative activities. In addition, the written curriculum includes

instructional materials, provides readings to give students additional background

information of what is being learned, and offers assessment procedures to help teachers

evaluate the learning.

Arkansas State Visual Arts Standards

The national visual art standards require art programs to teach more art

disciplines. The National Standards for Arts Education development by the Consortium

of National Arts Education Associations, published in 1994, established content and

achievement expectations for K-12 students considering aesthetic, history, creation, and

performance as basic curriculum content in visual arts (Dreeszen, Craig, & Comp, 2001).

DBAE content fits with most visual art standards. Dobbs (1992) stated that the

state frameworks for curriculum guidelines increasingly “require exposure and

experiences in the various art disciplines. While these comprehensive approaches go by

30


various names, they have much in common with DBAE and are often conceptually

identified with it.” (p. 66)

Arkansas visual arts strands of the fine arts curriculum frameworks were designed

to guide the art curriculum in grades K-12. They set specific students’ learning

expectations that explain what students in grades K-4, 5-8, and 9-12 should know and be

able to do in the art classroom during a school year. There are three content standards,

and each one depends on the other in a reciprocal way that represents a cycle process for

art making and responding to art. Thus, every standard has the same level of importance

and each standard needs the other to complete the process. The participants in this study

are K-4 grade art teachers; therefore, the content standards K-4 are provided (See

Appendix D).

In content standard One, (K-4), the students are expected to develop concepts and

ideas through the processes o f inquiring, exploring, and discovering a variety of

references such as, historical, cultural, social, environmental, and personal references.

Content Standard Two (K-4) aims to develop students’ creativity skills by manipulating a

wide variety of media, techniques, processes, and tools to develop original works of art

and design. Finally, content Standard Three (K-4) sets learning expectations through a

process of rediscovering and responding to artworks and concepts of self, of others, of

environment, and cultures. (Arkansas Department of Education, 2001, Fine Arts

Curriculum Framework section).

As indicated earlier, the literature did not indicate a recent evaluation of Arkansas

visual arts standards’ implementation in the state elementary schools. This study aims to

examine Arkansas elementary art teachers’ level of visual arts standards implementation

31


in their art instruction. In addition, it aims to provide additional standards objectives

according to the elementary art teachers’ opinions.

Arkansas State Teacher Accreditation

In January 1, 2002, Arkansas used a performance based system that provided

requirements for teacher license. The system required beginning teachers with less than

one year o f teaching experience to have a minimum of bachelor’s degree and to complete

Praxis I, II, and III in order to be licensed teachers. Praxis I tests the teachers’ basic skills

in reading, writing, and mathematics. Praxis I tests are taken before entering or at the

beginning o f a teacher preparation program. Praxis II provides tests that measure

teachers’ subject area content knowledge and teaching skills. These tests are taken either

while the teacher is enrolled in or toward the end of his/her preparation program. Praxis

III includes more advanced tests that assess the teachers in their own classroom settings,

and is required to change an Arkansas Initial Teaching License to a Standard Teaching

License. Praxis III is done by:

• Using written description o f the class and subject matter

• Utilizing a trained State Certified Assessor’s direct observation of the teacher’s

classroom practices

• Using structured interviews around the classroom observation

In addition, to be licensed a teacher must successfully meet the required criminal

background check. After completing the previous requirements, the teacher is eligible for

an initial teacher license valid for less than one year and no more than three years during

which the teacher is considered in a time o f Induction. During the induction, the novice

teacher is assigned to a trained mentor to support his/her practice and professional

32


growth. When the novice teacher’ teaching meets the mentoring requirements, Praxis III

performance assessment is scheduled. A standard teaching license is issued upon

successful completion of the Praxis III. All teachers are required to have 60 hours of

professional development per year (Arkansas Department of Education, 2001, Initial

licensure section).

Competency areas

The teacher competency documents states what that teacher should know and be

able to do in the subject or area for which the teacher is seeking license.

For teachers seeking licenses for teaching art, the state visual arts standards

should be understood by the teachers in terms of the knowledge, disposition, and

performance of each standard.

Standard One:

Teachers should understand the central concepts, tools o f inquiry, and structures

o f discipline(s) included in standard one. In addition, teachers also should be able to

create learning experiences to transfer these aspects to the students in a meaningful way

linking the disciplines to other subjects.

Standard Two:

Teachers should be able to plan appropriate curriculum to serve students, the

content, and the course objectives.

Standard Three:

The teachers should be able to plan instruction according to human growth and

development, learning theory, and the students’ needs (Arkansas State Department of

Education, 2001, Competency area- art section).

33


Summary

In the opening o f the twentieth century the focus of art education started to shift

from the industrial purposes to more inclusive education such as appreciation (Efland,

1990). Art education started to include more variety of goals such as, solving problems

relating to the individual living by discovering more and varied insights and

understanding in his/her daily life (Hopkins & Burnet, 1936). In addition, studies on

child drawing provided more understanding of the children’s artistic abilities

development. As a result, the traditional art teaching methods were investigated and new

methods appeared.

In 1960, Bruner’s ideas helped in shifting the focus o f education to more

comprehensive goals o f understanding and problem solving. Barkan introduced Burner’s

philosophy to art education which became more comprehensive by including art

experiences related to art subjects as art history, aesthetics, and art criticism. In 1980s,

comprehensive modifications in the conceptions o f art education’s goals, learners, teacher

training, and other aspects of art curriculum were required by the National Art Education

Association. The professional effort to provide a comprehensive art approach was

provided by the Getty education Institute for the Arts in 1984 when it developed the

discipline-based art education (DBAE) approach and supported it with research studies

and teacher training programs. DBAE aims to provide students with comprehensive

understanding of art education by exposing them to experiences in four art disciplines, art

making/studio art, art history, aesthetics, and art criticism.

The National Visual Arts Standards require art programs to be more

comprehensive by including more art disciplines such as aesthetics, art history, creation,

34


and performance. Therefore, the relationship between DBAE and the states’ frameworks

is reciprocal where DBAE was influenced by the state’s visual arts frameworks that

require a comprehensive approach to art and has influenced and changed many states’

arts frameworks.

This study aimed to examine Arkansas K-4 grade art teachers’ attitudes toward

the four foundational disciplines of DBAE, art making/studio art, art history, aesthetics,

and art criticism. This study also attempted to explore to what extent they implemented

Arkansas visual arts frameworks.

35


CHAPTER III

METHODS

Chapter III presents the methodology and procedures that were used in this study

to attain the study goals. This chapter includes: the research rationale, participants,

procedures, instrument, validation of the instrument, and measures used to analyze the

data collected.

Research Rationale

The objectives of this research were to gather attitudinal data concerning the

Arkansas K-4 grade elementary art teachers’ attitudes toward the four discipline

foundations of the DBAE and the extent of their implementation of the Arkansas

elementary school visual arts standards content in their lessons’ instructions. Teachers’

attitudes toward DBAE are important for the successful implementation of DBAE in

schools, “in order for a discipline-based art program to succeed, such a view must also be

accepted by teachers and principals” (Greer, 1984, p. 217). Moreover, additional

objectives that the Arkansas elementary art teachers may think need to be added to the

state visual arts standards were investigated in the study. Appendix B showed a survey

instrument with 56 items developed to gather data for this study.

Participants

The sample of this study consisted of 288 K-4 grade elementary art teachers

drawn from a population of 570 of Arkansas State K-4 grade elementary art teachers. For

statistical purposes the sample was divided into five sets according to each participant’s

36


school region. The sample was also divided into different sets of three categories

according to the teachers’ years of teaching experience, level of reading about teaching

art, level of confidence knowledge regarding teaching art, and level of job satisfaction.

In addition the sample was divided into two categories regarding educational degree and

whether or not the participants had degrees in teaching art. These categories were used as

independent variables to examine if they had significant effects on the participants’

attitudes toward DBAE and their implementation of the state visual arts standards.

Procedures and Data Collection

To collect data for this study these procedures were taken:

• The survey was sent to the Institutional Review Board (IRB) in the University of

Arkansas to get the approval that the survey meets the policies and procedures of

studies that involve human subjects.

• Prior to distributing the study questionnaires to the research study sample, five

copies of a pilot survey were mailed to five K-4 grade elementary art teachers in

Fayetteville, AR. Each survey had a cover letter asking the art teachers about the

clarity of the survey and the time that would take a participant to answer its items.

• The participants’ mailing addresses were obtained from the Arkansas State

Department of Education website. The total number of the questionnaires to be

sent to the participants was 570 copies or one questionnaire for each elementary

school in the state.

• The participants’ mailing addresses were saved in a Word document and typed

directly on the envelopes to avoid multiple use of one mailing address and to

insure that all participants received a copy of the questionnaire.

37


• Each survey included two cover letters. The first one was directed to the school

principal asking him/her to give the survey to the art teacher or the regular

classroom teacher who taught art education at the school (See Appendix A). The

second letter was directed to the art teacher explaining the research purpose and

goals and asking him/her to participate in the study (See Appendix B). The letter

also encouraged the participant for honest answers and indicated that the data will

be used for research purposes and that the participants’ names were not required.

Instrument

A survey questionnaire consisting of 56 items was developed to gather the data

for this study (See Appendix C). The participants’ characteristics are provided in items

1-8 that seek demographical data regarding participants’:

• Gender

• Years of teaching

• School region


• Degree in art

• Job Certification

• Employment status.

Items 9-12 asked for data concerning the participants’ knowledge and confidence

regarding teaching art including:

• The range of in-service training hours per school year directed toward art

education

38


• Reading of art education journals

• Level of reading about teaching art

• The teachers’ confidence level about teaching art

• Satisfaction with being an art teacher.

Items 13-24 in the survey were used to collect data about the participants’

background in the four discipline foundations of discipline-based art education (DBAE)

including:

• The teachers’ confidence level regarding their knowledge of each foundational

discipline,

• The teachers’ implementation of each discipline in their lesson instruction

• Whether or not they would like to take courses in each discipline.

Data investigating the participants’ attitudes toward the four foundational

disciplines of DBAE were collected by items 25-28. Items 29-55 were used to examine

the participants’ levels of implementation of the state visual arts standards in their lesson

instructions (See Appendix D). Finally, item 56 was an open ended question asking the

participants to suggest additional important objectives to be added to the Arkansas state

visual arts standards.

Variable List

There were two dependent variables, attitude and implementation, that served the

study’s two major questions. Each dependent variable had associated independent

variables.

39


Attitude:

The teachers’ attitude consisted of four dependent variables which investigated

the Arkansas K-4 grade elementary art teachers’ attitudes toward the four foundational

disciplines of discipline- based art education (DBAE): art making/ studio art, art history,

aesthetics, and art criticism. Art teachers’ attitudes toward the four foundational

disciplines were obtained in questions 25, 26, 27, and 28 and measured by a 5-point

Likert-type scale (i.e., 1-SD = strongly disagree, 2-D = disagree, 3-N = no opinion, 4-A =

agree, 5-SA = strongly agree). There were five independent variables associated with the

dependent variable of attitude. This study determined the statistically significant

difference in the participants’ means of attitudes toward the four foundational disciplines

of DBAE based on the following factors:

Educational degree: Educational degree was obtained from item 4 according to

the participants’ self reports that consisted of four points, less than bachelor, bachelor,

master, and other.

Whether or not the participants had degrees in teaching art: obtained in item 5 by

a yes/no question.

Level o f professional reading: Represented in item 10 in a 3-point Likert-type

scale, never, rarely, and often.

Level o f confidence regarding their knowledge o f studio art, art history, art

criticism, and aesthetics: This variable was addressed in items 13, 16, 19, and 22. This

variable was measured by a 3-point Likert-type scale indicating three levels of confidence

(i.e., high, moderate, and low).

40


Participants’ satisfaction o f being art teachers: The participants’ satisfaction of

being art teachers was obtained in item 12 and measured by a three-point Likert-type

scale with a three levels of satisfaction (i.e., high, moderate, and low).

Implementation:

The implementation was the second dependent variable that determined to what

extent the state visual arts standards were implemented in the participants’ lesson

instructions. The art teachers’ level of implementing consisted of 9 items for standard

one, 9 items for standard two, and 9 items for standard three. The means of

implementation of the state visual art standards were obtained in questions from item 29

to item 55 and measured by a 5-point Likert-type scale where 1 represented the lowest

implementation and 5 represented the highest implementation. There were four

independent variables used in this study to determine if there were significant differences

between Arkansas elementary art teachers implementation of the state visual arts

standards based on:

Years o f teaching experience: Years of teaching experience was addressed in item

2 depending on the participants’ self reports in the demographic section according to

three ranges of years of teaching experience, 1-7, 8-15, and 16 or above.

Educational degree: Educational degree was obtained in item 5 based on the

participants’ self reports in the demographic section indicating four levels, less than

bachelor, bachelor, master, and other.

Having a degree in art: obtained in item 5 by a yes/no question.

41


Self-efficacy regarding the participants’ knowledge o f the art subject: Self-

efficacy was obtained in item 11 and measured by a three-point Likert-type scale (i.e.,

high, moderate, and low).

Participants’ satisfaction o f being art teachers: The participants’ satisfaction of

being art teachers was addressed in item 12 and measured by a three-point Likert-type

scale, high, moderate, and low.

Pilot Study

Before sending the study survey, it was important to send several copies of the

survey to some participants just for practicing the survey. According to Mitchell and

Jolley (1992), a pilot study helps researchers to discover whether the participants

perceived the survey content as the researcher intended, whether the survey instruction

were clear, and whether the researcher provided the right amount of time for the research

tasks. The survey was sent to 5 elementary K-4 art teachers to evaluate its clarity and

design as well as the time that took the participant to complete the survey. The selection

of those teachers was due to their school’s geographical location, which was close to the

researcher who could conveniently contact them. The teachers’ recommendation and

suggestions were consolidated and applied to the final version of the survey before

distributing it to the study’s population. Based on the pilot study some items were

eliminated from the survey, namely, items 13, 17, 21, and 25, which asked for the

number of art making/studio art, art history, art criticism, and aesthetics courses that art

teachers took in their college study and professional development training programs,

were eliminated from the survey because two art teachers who participated in the pilot

study commented that it was difficult for them to recall the number of courses. It was

42


also expected that the participants would spend about 15 to 20 minutes to answer the

survey questions.

Measures

Descriptive data analysis was used with the demographic data using frequencies

and categories that divided the sample into groups according to the study questions. The

participants’ attitudes toward the four discipline foundations of DBAE in the survey

consisted of 4 items by which participants reported their attitudes on a 1-5 Likert-type

scale where 1 represents the highest level of disagreement and 5 represents the highest

level of agreement. The participants reported their implementation level of the state

visual arts standards in their lesson instruction by answering 27 items in the survey on a

1-5 Likert-type scale where 1 represents the lowest level of implementation and 5

represents the highest level of implementation.

Reliability and Validity

The survey was reviewed by the research committee members. In addition, the

survey was sent to five art teachers to review its content in terms of clarity and time that

would take a participant to fill out the survey. According to the experts and the pilot

study’s reviews, the survey was revised and some items were eliminated.

Attitude dependent variables were measured separately regarding their association

with the independent variables; therefore there was no need for calculating their internal

consistency.

Implementation dependent variables were measured together for each standard.

The dependent variables were tested to determine if the change in the dependent variables

43


is accounted for by the independent variables. The internal consistency of each

standard’s was tested by Cronbach alpha. The Cronbach’s alpha for standard one was

.84, which indicated that standard one items had a high reliability, more than 0.65. In

addition, the Cronbach’s alpha for standard two showed a high reliability of alpha = .90.

Finally, the Cronbach’s alpha indicated a high reliability of standard three items with

alpha = .87.

Table 1

Visual Arts Standards’ Reliability Coefficient

Scale Number of Items Cronbach’s Alpha

Visual Art Standard One 9 .840

Visual Art Standard Two 9 .896

Visual Art Standard Three 9 .840

Data Analysis Procedures

An independent sample t test was used to determine the statistically significant

difference in the mean of attitudes between two groups due to the participants’

educational level and whether or not a participant had a degree in teaching art. The

analysis of variance (ANOVA) is used to determine the mean differences among two or

more groups (Glass & Hopkins, 1996). One-way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) test

with an alpha level of .05 was used to determine if there were significant differences in

the participants’ attitude means toward the four disciplines of DBAE based on selected

44


independent variables, namely, professional reading level, level of confidence regarding

their knowledge of studio art, art history, art criticism, and aesthetics, and job satisfaction

level.

In addition, an independent sample t test was used to determine the statistically

significant differences in the groups’ mean of the three visual arts standards’

implementation due to the participants level of education (bachelor’s or master’s) and

whether or not they have degrees in teaching art. Moreover, one-way ANOVA tests with

alpha level of .05 were used to examine the significant differences between the

participants’ implementation levels of the state visual arts standards in their lesson

instructions due to (a) years of teaching experience, (b) educational level, (c) whether or

not having a degree in teaching art, (d) self-efficacy of their knowledge about teaching

art, and (e) level of job satisfaction.

Tukey (HSD) post-hoc analysis was conducted with significant ANOVA test

results to determine the significant differences that occurred among the groups’ means of

attitude. Tukey’s HSD (honestly significant difference) test is the most widely used

procedure to test hypotheses about all pairwise contrasts (Kirk, 1995).

The Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS), version 14.0., was used to

analyze the data. As a criterion for statistical significance a .05 alpha level (type one

error rate) was used.

Delimitation of the Study

This study investigated the Arkansas K-4 grade elementary school art teachers’

attitudes toward the importance of the four foundations of the discipline- based art

45


education (DBAE) and their implementation of Arkansas visual arts standards in their

lesson instructions. This study was limited to:

• The State of Arkansas K-4 grade elementary art teachers

• Results of the Arkansas K-4 grade elementary art teachers’ attitudes were limited

to the discipline- based art education approach and its four foundational art

disciplines: art making/ studio art, art history, aesthetics , and art criticism

• Results of the Arkansas K-4 grade elementary art teachers implementation of the

Arkansas visual arts standards were limited to the Arkansas visual arts standards

revised in 2001

46


CHAPTER IV

FINDINGS

Chapter four provides an analysis of the study data providing the types of

statistical tests used in the study and their results. Each research hypothesis was tested,

and the statistical tests’ results determined the acceptance and rejection of hypotheses.

The purpose of this research study was to explore Arkansas K-4 grade elementary

art teachers’ attitudes toward the four foundational disciplines of discipline-based art

education (DBAE), art making/studio art, art history, aesthetics, and art criticism. In

addition, this study aimed to examine to what extent Arkansas fine art standards are

implemented in the state elementary schools’ art rooms. Moreover, the study investigated

the relationship between the dependent variables of attitude and implementation and

other independent variables: namely, years of teaching experience, educational level,

certification, having a degree in art, self efficacy toward the subject knowledge, and level

of job satisfaction. Independent sample t test and one way ANOVA tests were used to

determine the groups’ overall differences. Ten hypotheses were presented as five

hypotheses for each major research question tested at .05 alpha level of significance using

SPSS program version 14.0.

Pilot Study

Prior to distributing the study questionnaires, five pilot survey questionnaires

were mailed to five elementary art teachers in Fayetteville, Arkansas. The purpose of this

procedure was to get the art teachers’ feedback about the clarity of the questionnaire’s

items and the time it would take a participant to answer the questions. With each

questionnaire a pilot study two letters (See Appendix A and B) and a self addressed

47


envelope with a stamp were enclosed. The art teachers were given a week to complete

and return the questionnaires.

The five questionnaires were filled out and returned to the researcher with

valuable feed back and comments. Two art teachers indicated that they could not answer

items 13, 17, 21, and 25. These items asked for the number of courses that included art

making/studio art, art history, aesthetics, and criticism, that an art teacher took in his/her

professional training programs. The art teachers commented that they can not recall the

number. “I should check my record” one art teacher said. Other than those four items,

the rest of items were clear and easy to answer as indicated by the art teachers. The time

took the art teachers to fill out the survey ranged from 8-25 minutes.

As a result of the pilot study’s feedback, items 13, 17, 21, and 25 were eliminated

from the study questionnaire because it was difficult, especially for art teachers with

longer years of teaching experience, to recall the number of courses taken in the four art

discipline.

In addition, the expected time for filling out the survey was 15-20 minutes as

shown in the questionnaire cover letter (See Appendix B).

Data Collection

A 56 item survey questionnaire was developed to collect data for this study. The

questionnaire included items that sought demographic data providing characteristics of

the participants including years of teaching experience, educational degree, whether or

not they have a degree in art, reading level, knowledge confidence, and job satisfaction.

The collected data from these items were used to categorize the study’s sample and create

the five independent variables for the study’s dependent variables of DBAE attitude and

48


standards implementation. Five hundred and seventy survey questionnaires were sent.

The 570 is the total number of elementary schools that included K-4 grade in Arkansas

State according to the State Educational Department’s website from which the schools’

mailing addresses were obtained. After two weeks, 207 questionnaires were returned,

less than 40% of the total questionnaire number. According to Krejcie and Morgan

(1970), the minimum sample size for a population of 570 to be representative was 40%.

As indicated earlier, each survey had a code in an Excel file. The researcher eliminated

the received questionnaire codes from the file and sent reminder letters with

questionnaire copies to the participants who did not send their questionnaires back. After

two weeks, 85 questionnaires were returned. Of the 570 distributed questionnaires 292

questionnaires were returned with an overall response rate of 51%, which means that the

study sample could be considered representative for the population.

Elimination of Record

Four questionnaires out of 292 were eliminated due to the repeated selection of

the same number in each scale all over the questionnaire items. For instant, a participant

would select number 5 in a scale of one to five for items 25 through item 55. The

researcher assumed that the participant did not read the questionnaire’s instructions and

items. Therefore, those questionnaires were eliminated because they were assumed that

they did not reflect the participants’ true answers. The total number of questionnaire

used in this study was 288 questionnaires representing a 50% of the overall response rate.

Participants

The participants of this study were a sample of 288 Arkansas K-4 grade art

teachers drawn from a population of all Arkansas K-4 grade elementary schools.

49


Table 2 shows the participants’ characteristics. The female participants’ ratio was

greater than the male participants’ in the study’s sample. Ninety percent of the

participants were female.

The greater number of participants in the sample appeared to have either the

lower or the higher range of years of teaching experience categories. Thirty-seven

percent of the participants have a range of 1 to 7 years of teaching experience, 27% have

arrange of 8 to 15 years of experience, and 36% have a range of 16 or above years of

experience.

The study sample consisted of participants representing K-4 grade art teachers

from the state’s five regions. Central, Northwest, and Northeast Arkansas regions had the

largest percentage of the participants.

Regarding the participants’ level of education, the participants’ highest degrees

were Bachelor’s and Master’s. In the study sample, 69% hold Bachelor’s degree and

31% hold Master’s degree. Sixty-six percent of participants have a degree in art while

34% do not. For certification, the study’s data indicated that 85% of the participants are

certified teachers, and 15% are not certified. The vast majority of participants were

permanent regular teachers with a 99% and only 1 % of the participants were permanent

substitute teachers assigned on regular term basis. One participant did not provide

answer for this item.

50


Table 2

The Participants Characteristics

Gender Frequency Percent

Female 259 90%

Male 29 10%

School Region

Central 85 29%

Northeast 60 21%

Southeast 34 12%

Northwest 74 26%

Southwest 34 12%

Participants’ Years of Teaching Experience

1-7 106 37%

8-15 79 27%

16+ 103 36%

Level of Education

Bachelor’s 200 69%

Master’s 88 31%

Degree in Teaching Art

Have a degree in art 189 66%

Do not have a degree in art 99 34%

51


Table 2 Continues

Certification

Certified 244 85%

Uncertified 44 15%

Employment Status

Permanent Regular teacher 284 99%

Permanent Substitute Teacher 3 1%

Table 3 shows data about the participants’ professional knowledge regarding

teaching art and their job satisfaction. Item 8 in the questionnaire set different ranges of

in-service training hours directed toward art education that the participants had per school

year. Twenty percent of the participants did not have in-service training hours in art

education. Most of the participants’ percentages fell in the ranges of 1-10 hours with a

21%, 11-20 with a 26%, and 21-30 hours with a 21% percent of the participants. Only

10% of the participants had 31 or more hours directed to art education in their in-service

training per school year. There were 2% of the participants that did not provide answer

for this item.

Regarding journal reading, data indicate that 62% of the participants read

journals, and 37% do not. Fifty one percent of the participants who read journals read the

Journal of Art Education. The least read journal was the Journal of Aesthetics Education,

which was read by only 3% of the participant journal readers. Studies in Art Education

journal was read by 16% of the sample journal readers. Moreover, 26% of the journal

readers indicated that they read other journals. For, the participants’ level of reading,

52


69% of the participants read often about teaching art. The rarely reading level about art

was selected by 28% of the participants. Fewer participants, 3%, never read about art.

For the participants’ knowledge confidence about their subject, data indicated that

59% of participants have a high level of knowledge confidence, 37% have a moderate

level of knowledge confidence, and 4% have a low level of knowledge confidence.

As shown in Table 3, more than three quarters of the participants, 86%, are

satisfied with their job as art teachers, 10% of the participants’ have a moderate level of

job satisfaction, and 4% have a low level of job satisfaction.

Table 3

The participants’ knowledge and confidence and Job Satisfaction Level

Frequency PercentageHours of In- Service Training Per School Year Directed to Art Education

0 Hours 57 20%

1-10 Hours 60 21%

11-20 Hours 75 26%

21-30 Hours 61 21%

31 or More 28 10%

Journal Reading

Art Education 146 51%

Journal of Aesthetics Education 10 3%

Studies in Art Education 45 16%

Others 76 26%

None 106 37%

53


Table 3 Continues

Level of Professional Reading

Often 200 69%

Rarely 80 28%

Never 8 3%

Subject Knowledge Confidence

High 170 59%

Moderate 106 37%

Low 12 4%

Job Satisfaction Leve

High 200 86%

Moderate 80 10%

Low 8 4 %

Regarding the DBAE foundational disciplines implementation in the classroom,

Table 4 shows the frequencies and percentages of introducing each discipline in the

lesson instruction. In addition, the table indicates whether or not the art teachers would

like to take a course in each discipline. For art making, all the participants, 100%,

introduced art making in their lesson instruction. When asked if they would like to take a

course in art making, 85% of the participants answer was yes, and 15% of the participants

answered no. In terms of art history, the majority (93%) of the participants introduced art

history in their lesson instruction. Seventy three percent of the participants would like to

take a course in art history, while 27% of them would not. For aesthetics discipline, 85%

54


of the participants indicated that they introduced aesthetics in their lesson instruction.

The remaining 15% of the participants did not introduce aesthetics in their art lessons.

Three quarters (76%) of the participants would like to take a course in aesthetics, while

24% of the participants did not. Finally, in the art lessons of 83% of the participants, art

criticism was introduced, and it was not introduced in the lessons of 17% of the

participants. Seventy four percent of the art teachers who participated in this study

indicated that they would like to take a course in art criticism, while the rest 26% of them

would not like to take a course in art criticism.

Table 4

Frequency and Percentage o f Introducing and Preferring Taking a Course in Each Discipline o f DBAE

Introduce Art Making in the lesson Instruction Frequency Percent

Introduce Art Making in the lesson Instruction

Yes 288 100%

No 0 0%

Like to Take a Course in Art Making

Yes 245 85%

No 43 15%

Introduce Art History in the lesson Instruction

Yes 268 93%

No 19 7%

55


Table 4 Continues

Like to Take a Course in Art History

Yes 210 73%

No 78 27%

Introduce Aesthetics in the lesson Instruction

Yes 245 85%

No 43 15%

Like to Take a Course in Aesthetics

Yes 220 76%

No 68 24%

Introduce Art Criticism in the lesson Instruction

Yes 239 83%

No 48 17%

Like to Take a Course in Art Criticism

Yes 212 74%

No 75 26%

Research Question One

This research study had two major research questions with associated sub

questions. The first research question sought the Arkansas State K-4 grade elementary

art teachers’ attitude toward the four discipline foundations of discipline- based art

education (DBAE): art production, art history, aesthetics, and art criticism. It also

attempted to examine significant differences in the means of the dependent variable of

56


attitude based on selected variables of educational level, holding a degree in art, level of

reading, confidence regarding the subject knowledge, and the level of job satisfaction.

An independent-sample t test and one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) test were used

to answer research question one. Moreover, Tukey (HSD) post-hoc analysis was

conducted with significant ANOVA test results to determine the significant differences

that occurred among the groups’ means of attitude.

The Frequency and Percentage of the Participants’ Attitude toward DBAE

To explore the participants’ attitude toward each foundational discipline of

DBAE, a 5-point Likert-type scale was used (i.e., 1-SD = strongly disagree, 2-D =

disagree, 3-N = no opinion, 4-A = agree, 5-SA = strongly agree). As depicted in table 14,

no participants selected strongly disagree for any discipline. For the importance of

including art making in instructional art units, the majority of the participants (251)

strongly agreed with a percentage of (87%), 33 participants selected agree (11%), 3

participants selected no opinion (1%), and only one participant selected disagree (.3%).

Regarding the participants’ attitude toward the importance of including art history in the

art unit, more than a half of the art teachers (170, 59%) strongly agreed, 86 participants

agreed, (30%), 25 participants had no opinion (9%), and only 7 participants disagreed

(2%). In addition, 119 participants strongly agreed that aesthetics was important to be

included in art lessons (41%), 125 participants selected agree (43%), 35 participants

selected no opinion (12%), and 9 participants disagreed (3%). For art criticism, the

fourth foundational discipline of DBAE, only one third of the art teachers (107, 37%)

strongly agreed about the importance of including art criticism in the art unit, 116 (40%)

57


of the participants agreed, 46 (16%) of the participants had no opinion, and 19 (7%)

disagreed about the importance of including art criticism.

Table 5

Frequency and Percentage o f the Participants’ Attitude toward DBAE

DisciplineThis (Art Discipline) is Important to be Included in

the Art Instructional Unit

S,r° n81>’ Disagree N Agree S,r0n^Disagree Agree

Art Making FrequencyPercentage

00

1.3

31.0

3311.5

25187.2

Art History FrequencyPercentage

00

72.4

258.7

8629.9

17059.0

Aesthetics Frequency 0 9 35 125 119Percentage 0 3.1 12.2 43.4 41.3

Art Criticism Frequency 0 19 46 116 107Percentage 0 6.6 16.0 40.3 37.2

Hypothesis One

There are differences in Arkansas elementary art teachers’ mean of attitude

toward the importance of the four foundational art disciplines o f DBAE, Art

Making/Studio Art, Art History, Aesthetics, and Art Criticism based on the art

teachers’ education level.

An independent-sample t test was conducted to determine if there was no

statistically significant difference between the dependent variable of the groups’ attitude

mean toward the importance of art making in the art teaching based on the independent

58


variable of the participants’ educational degrees, Bachelor’s and Master’s. The

independent-sample t test showed that there was no statistical significant difference in the

attitude mean of the group of participants who have Bachelor’s degrees (M = 4.86, SD =

.40) and the attitude mean of participants who have Master’s degrees (M = 4.84, SD =

.42) with an alpha level of p > .05. The null hypothesis was retained.

Hypothesis Two

There are differences between Arkansas elementary art teachers’ attitude

means toward the importance of the four foundational art disciplines o f DBAE, Art

Making/Studio Art, Art History, Aesthetics, and Art Criticism based on whether or not

the Arkansas elementary art teachers hold a degree in teaching a r t.

To test research hypothesis two, an independent-sample t test was run to

determine if there was a statistically significant difference in the two groups’ attitude

means toward the importance of the DBAE four disciplines based on the independent

variable of whether or not the participants hold degrees in teaching art.

Art Makine

The independent-sample t test results indicated that art teachers holding degrees

in teaching art had significantly higher mean of attitude toward the importance of art

making in teaching art (M = 4.92, SD = .29) than the art teachers who did not have

degrees in teaching art (M - 4.73, SD = .55). The t test was significant at a probability of

p < .001 and a t value of 3.27 with a large effect size of .40. The null hypothesis was

rejected.

59


Table 6

Independent Sample t test fo r Importance o f Art Making Based on Having a Degree in

Teaching Art

N Mean Difference t value P ES

Have Degree in Art 189 4.92

.19* 3.27* .001* .40

Don’t Have Degree in Art 99 4.73

Note. * P < .05

Art History

For the differences in the Arkansas elementary art teachers’ attitudes mean toward

the importance of art history in art teaching due to the independent variable of having

degree in art, the independent-sample t test was statistically significant (t = 4.36, p <

.001) with a large effect size of .60. Art teachers who had degrees in teaching art (M =

4.61, SD = .60) had a higher mean of attitude toward the importance of art history than

the art teachers who did not have degrees in teaching art (M = 4.16, SD = .92). The null

hypothesis was rejected.

Table 7

Independent Sample t test fo r Importance o f Art History Based Having a Degree in

Teaching Art



.45* 4.97* .000* .60


60


Note. * P < .05

Aesthetics

The independent-sample t test determined that there was a statistically significant

difference between the Arkansas elementary art teachers’ attitudes toward the importance

of aesthetics in art based on the independent variable of having a degree in art (t = 3.35, p

< .001) with a large effect size of .41. Art teachers who had degrees in art showed

statistical significant difference of a higher mean of attitude (M = 4.34, SD = .74) toward

that importance of aesthetics in teaching art compared to the art teachers who did not

hold degrees in art (M = 4.02, SD = .82). The null hypothesis was rejected.

Table 8

Independent Sample t test fo r Importance o f Aesthetics Based on Having a Degree in

Teaching Art



.32* 3.35* .001* .41


Note. * P < .05

Art Criticism

The independent-sample t test also indicated a statistically significant difference

between the Arkansas elementary art teachers’ attitudes toward the importance of art

criticism in art due to the independent variable of having a degree in art (t = 4.91, p <

.001) with a large effect size of .58. The mean of attitude toward the importance of art

criticism in teaching art for the Arkansas elementary art teachers who held degrees in art

61


is significantly higher (M = 4.26, SD = .79) than the attitude mean of the art teachers who

did not hold degrees in teaching art (M = 3.74, SD = .97). The null hypothesis was

rejected.

Table 9

Independent Sample t test fo r Importance o f Art Criticism Based on Having a Degree in

Teaching Art



.52* 4.91* .001* .58


Note. * P < .05

Hypothesis Three

There are differences among Arkansas elementary art teachers’ attitude means

toward the importance of the four foundational art disciplines of DBAE, Art

Making/Studio Art, Art History, Aesthetics, and Art Criticism based on the Arkansas

elementary art teachers’ professional reading level.

A one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) test was conducted to determine if

there was a statistically significance difference in the dependent variable mean of attitude

toward the DBAE four foundational disciplines due to the independent variable of

participants’ three professional reading levels, often, rarely, and never. A Tukey (HSD)

post-hoc analysis was used to determine between group significant differences in the

mean of attitude toward the importance of the DBAE four art disciplines.

62


Art Making

Result showed statistically significant differences among the groups’ attitude

means toward the importance of art making in teaching due to the independent variable of

reading level. The main effect (F = 35.24, p < .008) was statistically significant at an

alpha level of < .05 with a small effect size of .20.

Table 10

One-Way Analysis o f Variance fo r Importance o f Art Making Due to Professional

Reading Level

dfSum of Square

MeanSquare F P>F ES

Reading Level 2 9.49 4.75 35.24* .008* .20

Error 285 38.38 .13

Corrected Total 287 47.87

Note. * P < .05

A Tukey (HSD) post-hoc analysis was run to show the between group significant

difference of the mean of attitude toward the importance of art making in teaching art.

The Tukey result indicated a statistically significant difference between often reading

level group rarely reading level group with a mean difference of .17. In addition, there

was a statistically significant difference between often reading level group and the never

reading level group with a mean difference of 1.05. The rarely reading level group and

never reading level group significantly differed in their attitude means with a mean

difference of .89.

63


The often reading level participants had significantly higher mean of attitude

toward the importance of art making (M = 4.93, SD = .27) than the rarely reading level

participants (M = 4.76, SD = .45). The never reading level participants had the lowest

attitude mean among the groups (M = 3.88, SD = .99).

Chart 1

A Distribution o f the Participants’ Mean o f Attitude toward the Importance o f Art

Making Due to their Professional Reading Level

5 -

4 .5 -

<4 -

Oc<00)S

3 .5 -

Never Rarely Often

Reading Level

(Never < Rarely < Often)

Art History

For the participants’ attitude toward the importance of the second foundational

discipline of DBAE, art history, the one-way analysis of variance test indicated that there

were statistically significant differences in the dependent variable of participants’ attitude

means toward art history due to the independent variable of participants’ three levels of

64


professional reading. Results showed a statistically significant difference among the

groups’ means of often read, rarely read, and never read. The main effect (F = 47.74, p <

.001) was statistically significant at an alpha level of <.05 with a medium effect size of

.25.

Table 11

One-Way Analysis o f Variance fo r Importance o f Art History Due to Professional

Reading Level

dfSum of Square

MeanSquare F P>F ES

Reading Level 2 41.01 20.50 47.74* .000* .25

Error 285 122.41 .43


Note. * P < .05

A Tukey (HSD) post-hoc analysis was utilized to show the between group

significant difference of the mean of attitude toward the importance of art history in

teaching art. The Tukey result indicated a statistically significant difference between the

often reading level group and the rarely reading level group with a mean difference of

.64. In addition, there was a statistically significant difference between the often reading

level group and the never reading level group with a mean difference of 1.68. The rarely

reading level group and never reading level group significantly differed in their attitude

means with a mean difference of 1.04.

The often reading level group had significantly a higher mean of attitude toward

the importance of art history in art teaching (M = 4.68, SD = .53) than the rarely reading

65


level participants (M = 4.04, SD = .86). The never reading level group had the lowest

attitude mean among the groups (M = 3.00, SD = 1.06).

Chart 2

A Distribution o f the Participants’ Mean o f Attitude toward the Importance o f Art History

Due to their Professional Reading Level

5 “

4 .5 “

4 -

3 .5 -

3 -

2 .5 -

OftenNever Rarely

Reading Level


Aesthetics

Regarding the participants’ attitude toward the importance of the third

foundational discipline of DBAE, aesthetics, the one-way analysis of variance test

showed that there was a statistically significant difference among the dependent variable

of participants’ attitude means toward aesthetics due to the independent variable of

participants’ three levels of professional reading, often reading level, rarely reading level,

66


and never reading level. The main effect (F = 25.34, p < .001) was statistically

significant at an alpha level of <.05 with a small effect size of .15.

Table 12

One-Way Analysis o f Variance fo r Importance o f Aesthetics Due to Professional Reading

Level

dfSum of Square

MeanSquare F P>F ES

Reading Level 2 26.40 13.20 25.34* .000* .15

Error 285 148.47 .52


Note. * P < .05

The Tukey result determined a statistically significant difference in the mean of

attitude toward the importance of aesthetics between often reading level group rarely

reading level group with a mean difference of .44. In addition, there was a statistical

significant difference between the often reading level group and the never reading level

group with a mean difference of 1.52. The rarely reading level group and never reading

level group significantly differed in their attitude means with a mean difference of 1.07.

The group of often reading level had a significantly higher mean of attitude

toward the importance of aesthetics in art teaching (M = 4.40, SD = .66) than the group

of rarely reading level (M = 3.95, SD = .85). The never reading level group had the

lowest attitude mean among the groups (M = 2.88, SD = .64).

67


Chart 3

A Distribution o f the Participants’ Mean o f Attitude toward the Importance o f Aesthetics

Due to their Professional Reading Level

5 “

4 .5 “

4 -

h - 3 .5 -

3 -

2 .5 -

OftenN ever R are ly

Reading Level


Art Criticism

For the participants’ attitude toward the importance of the fourth foundational

discipline of DBAE, art criticism, the one-way ANOVA test indicated that there were

statistically significant differences in the dependent variable of participants’ attitude

means toward art criticism due to the independent variable of participants’ three levels of

professional reading. Results showed a statistically significant difference among the

groups’ means of often read, rarely read, and never read. The main effect (F = 32.30, p <

.001) was statistically significant at an alpha level of <.05 with a small effect size of .18.

68


Table 13

One-Way Analysis o f Variance fo r Importance o f Art Criticism Due to Professional

Reading Level

dfSum of Square

MeanSquare F P>F ES

Reading Level 2 41.98 20.99 32.30* .000* .18

Error 285 185.18 .65


Note. * P < .05

Tukey (HSD) post-hoc analysis was utilized to show the between group

significant difference of the mean of attitude toward the importance of art criticism in

teaching art. The Tukey result indicated a statistically significant difference between the

often reading level group and the rarely reading level group with a mean difference of

.61. In addition, there was a statistically significant difference between the often reading

level group and the never reading level group with a mean difference of 1.80. The rarely

reading level group and the never reading level group significantly differed in their

attitude means with a mean difference of 1.19.

The often reading level group significantly had higher mean of attitude toward the

importance of art criticism in art teaching (M = 4.30, SD = .73) than the rarely reading

level participants (M = 3.69, SD = .99). The never reading level group had the lowest

attitude mean among the groups (M - 2.50, SD = .53).

69


Chart 4


Criticism Due to their Professional Reading Level

5 “

4 .5 “

4 -

< 3 .5 -

3 -

2 .5 -

Never Rarely Often

Reading Level


Hypothesis Four

There are differences among Arkansas elementary art teachers’ attitude means



elementary art teachers’ subject knowledge confidence.

A one-way ANOVA test was used to examine if there were statistically

significance differences in the dependent variable means of attitude toward the DBAE

four foundational disciplines due to the independent variable of participants’ confidence

level regarding their knowledge about each discipline. Participants were classified in

70


three groups regarding their confidence knowledge level of each discipline, high,

moderate, and low. Tukey (HSD) post-hoc analysis was conducted with the significant

ANOVA result to determine between group significant differences in the mean of attitude

toward the importance of the four foundational disciplines of DBAE.

Art Making

One way ANOVA test result showed a statistically significant difference of the

three groups’ attitude means toward the importance of art making in teaching art. The

main effect (F = 24.69, p < .001) was statistically significant at an alpha level of < .05

with a small effect size of .15.

Table 14

One-Way Analysis o f Variance fo r Importance o f Art Making Based on the Participants ’

Confidence Knowledge Level o f Art Making

DfSum of Square

MeanSquare F P>F ES

Art Making Knowledge Confidence Level

2 7.07 3.53 24.69* .000* .15

Error 285 40.80 .14


Note. * P < .05

The Tukey (HSD) post-hoc analysis test was conducted to determine between

group significant differences in the mean of attitude toward the importance of art making

in teaching art. The Tukey result indicated a statistically significant difference between

the high art making confidence knowledge level group and the moderate art making

confidence knowledge level group with a mean difference of .18. In addition, there was a

71


statistical significant difference between high art making confidence knowledge level

group and the low art making confidence knowledge level group with a mean difference

of .61. The moderate art making confidence knowledge level group significantly scored

higher than the low art making confidence knowledge group with attitude means

difference of .43.

The high art making confidence knowledge level group significantly had the

highest mean of attitude toward the importance of art making in art teaching (M = 4.95,

SD = .23) among the three groups. The moderate art making confidence knowledge level

group came second with a mean of (M = 4.77, SD = .52). The low art making confidence

knowledge group had the lowest attitude mean among the groups (M = 4.33, SD = .68).

Chart 5


Making Based on the Participants’ Art Making Confidence Knowledge Level

U lcCO2t:<oc<0«2

Low M oderate

Art Making Knowledge Confidence Level

(Low < Moderate < High)

72


Art History

One-way ANOVA test results determined that there were statistically significant

differences in the three groups’ attitude means toward the importance of art history in

teaching art due to the participants’ confidence level of art history knowledge. The main

effect (F = 72.62, p < .001) was statistically significant at an alpha level of < .05 with a

medium effect size of .34.

Table 15

One-Way Analysis o f Variance fo r Importance o f Art History Based on the Participants’

Confidence Knowledge Level o f Art History

DfSum of Square

MeanSquare F P>F ES

Art History Knowledge Confidence Level

2 55.17 27.58 72.62* .000* .34

Error 285 108.25 .38


Note. * P < .05

The Tukey (HSD) post-hoc analysis showed a statistically significant difference

between the high art history confidence knowledge level group and the moderate art

history confidence knowledge level group with a mean difference of .41. Moreover,

there was a statistically significant difference between high art history confidence

knowledge level group and the low art history confidence knowledge level group with a

mean difference of 1.47. The moderate art history confidence knowledge level group

significantly scored higher than the low art history confidence knowledge group with

attitude means difference of 1.06.

73


The high art history confidence knowledge level group significantly had higher

mean of attitude toward the importance of art history in art teaching (M = 4.81, SD = .41)

than the moderate art history confidence knowledge level group (M = 4.40, SD = .68).

The low art history confidence knowledge level group had the lowest attitude mean

among the groups (M = 3.34, SD = .90).

Chart 6


Based on the Participants’ Art History Confidence Knowledge Level

5 “

4.5-

4 -

h_ 3 .5-

3 -

2.5-

Low M oderate High

Art History Knowledge Confidence Level


Aesthetics

For the aesthetics the third foundational discipline of DBAE, the one-way

ANOVA test result determined statistically significant differences in the three groups’

74


attitude means toward the importance of aesthetics in teaching art. The main effect (F =

34.29, p < .001) was statistically significant at an alpha level of < .05 with a small effect

size of .19.

Table 16

One-Way Analysis o f Variance fo r Importance o f Aesthetics Based on the Participants’

Confidence Knowledge Level o f Aesthetics

DfSum of Square

MeanSquare F P>F ES

Aesthetics Knowledge Confidence Level

2 33.92 16.96 34.29* .000* .19

Error 285 140.95 .49


Note. * P < .05

The Tukey (HSD) post-hoc analysis test result indicated a statistically significant

difference between the high aesthetics confidence knowledge level group and the

moderate aesthetics confidence knowledge level group with a mean difference of .42.

Also, there was a statistically significant difference between the high aesthetics

confidence knowledge level group and the low aesthetics confidence knowledge level

group with a mean difference of 1.06. The moderate aesthetics confidence knowledge

level group significantly scored higher than the low aesthetics confidence knowledge

group with an attitude means difference of .64.

The high aesthetics confidence knowledge level group significantly had the

highest mean of attitude toward the importance of aesthetics in art teaching (M = 4.57,

SD = .61) among the three groups. Then, the moderate aesthetics confidence knowledge

75


level group came second with a mean of (M = 4.15, SD = .71). Finally, the low

aesthetics confidence knowledge group had the lowest attitude mean among the groups

(M = 3.51, SD = .91).

Chart 7


Based on the Participants ’ Aesthetics Confidence Knowledge Level

5 -

4 .5 -

V > A -o 4 -

a>.c</><D<o 3.5“

C(Da>S3 -

2 .5 -

Low M o d era te H igh

Aesthetics Knowledge Confidence Level


Art Criticism

Regarding art criticism, the fourth foundational discipline of DBAE, the one way

ANOVA test result showed statistically significant differences among the three art

criticism knowledge confidence level groups’ attitude means toward the importance of art

76


criticism. The main effect (F = 32.30, p < .001) was statistically significant at an alpha

level of < .05 with a medium effect size of .25.

Table 17

One-Way Analysis o f Variance fo r Importance o f Art Criticism Based on the

Participants’ Confidence Knowledge Level o f Art Criticism

DfSum of Square

MeanSquare F P>F ES

Criticism Knowledge Confidence Level

2 57.07 28.54 47.88* .000* . 25

Error 285 169.24 .60


Note. * P < .05

The Tukey result showed a statistically significant difference between the high art

criticism confidence knowledge level group and the moderate art criticism confidence

knowledge level group with a mean difference of .55. In addition, there was a

statistically significant difference between high art criticism confidence knowledge level

group and the low art criticism confidence knowledge level group with a mean difference

of 1.38. The moderate art criticism confidence knowledge level group scored

significantly higher than the low art criticism confidence knowledge level group with

attitude means difference of .84.

The high art criticism confidence knowledge level group significantly had the

highest mean of attitude toward the importance of art criticism in art teaching (M = 4.56,

SD = .63) among the three groups. The moderate art criticism confidence knowledge

77


level group had an attitude mean of (M = 4.01, SD = .79). The low art criticism

confidence knowledge level group came last with attitude mean of (M = 3.17, SD

Chart 8


Criticism Related to the Participants’ Art Criticism Confidence Knowledge Level

5 -

4 .5 -

4 -

< 3 .5 -

3 -

2 .5 -

L ow M o d e ra te H ig h

Criticism Knowledge Confidence Level


78


Hypothesis Five

There are differences in the Arkansas elementary art teachers’ attitude means

toward the importance of the four foundational art disciplines o f DBAE, Art


elementary art teachers’ job Satisfaction Level.

To test hypothesis five, a one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) test was used to

examine if there were statistically significant differences in the dependent variable,

means of attitude toward the DBAE four foundational disciplines, due to the independent

variable, participants’ job satisfaction level. Participants were classified in three groups

regarding their job satisfaction level, high, moderate, and low. A Tukey (HSD) post-hoc

analysis was conducted to determine the between group significant differences in the

mean of attitude toward the importance of the four foundational disciplines of DBAE.

Art making

Regarding art making, the first foundational discipline of DBAE, the one-way

ANOVA test results indicated statistically significant differences among the three groups’

attitude means toward the importance of art making in teaching art. The main effect (F =

30.42, p < .002) was statistically significant at an alpha level of < .05 with a small effect

size of .17.

79


Table 18

One-Way Analysis o f Variance fo r Importance o f Art Making Due to the Participants’

Job Satisfaction Level

DfSum of Square

MeanSquare F P>F ES

Job Satisfaction 2 8.42 4.21 30.42* .002* .17

Error 285 39.45 .14


Note. * P < .05

The Tukey result determined a statistically significant difference between the high

job satisfaction level group and the moderate job satisfaction level group regarding their

attitude mean toward the importance of art making with a mean difference of .39.

Moreover, there was a statistically significant difference between the high job satisfaction

level group and the low job satisfaction level group with a mean difference of .72. The

moderate job satisfaction level group significantly scored higher than the low job

satisfaction level group with attitude means difference of .33.

The high job satisfaction level group significantly had the highest mean of attitude

toward the importance of art making in art teaching (M = 4.92, SD = .27) among the

three groups. The moderate job satisfaction level group had the moderate attitude mean

of (M = 4.53, SD = .73). The low job satisfaction level group had the lowest attitude

mean of (M = 4.20, SD = .79).

80


Chart 9

A Distribution o f the Participants' Mean o f Attitude toward the Importance o f Art

Making Due to the Participants' Job Satisfaction Level

5 -

4 .5 -

O)

4 -

3 .5 -

Low M o d era te H igh



Art History

Regarding art history, the one-way ANOVA test results showed statistically

significant differences among the three groups’ attitude means toward the importance of

art history in teaching art due to the independent variable, job satisfaction. The main


small effect size of .12.

81


Table 19

One-Way Analysis o f Variance fo r Importance o f Art History Due to the Participants’


DfSum of Square

MeanSquare F P>F ES


Error 285 143.39 .50


Note. * P < .05

The Tukey result determined a statistically significant difference between the high


attitude mean toward the importance of art history with a mean difference of .48.

Moreover, there was a statistically significant difference between high job satisfaction

level group and the low job satisfaction level group with a mean difference of 1.25. The

moderate job satisfaction level group’s attitude mean was significantly higher than the

low job satisfaction level group’s with attitude means difference of .77.

The high job satisfaction level group significantly scored a higher mean of

attitude toward the importance of art history in art teaching (M = 4.55, SD = .66) than the

moderate job satisfaction level group (M = 4.07, SD = .91). The low job satisfaction

level group had the lowest attitude mean toward the importance of art history with a

mean of (M = 3.30, SD = 1.16).

82


Chart 10


Due to the Participants’ Job Satisfaction Level

5 -

4 .5 -

4 -

_ 3 .5 -

3 -

2 .5 -

L o w M o d e ra te H ig h



Aesthetics

Regarding aesthetics, the one-way ANOVA test results determined statistically

significant differences among the three groups’ attitude means toward the importance of

aesthetics in teaching art due to the independent variable, job satisfaction. The main


small effect size o f . 11.

83


Table 20

One-Way Analysis o f Variance fo r Importance o f Aesthetics Due to the Participants’ Job

Satisfaction Level

DfSum of Square

MeanSquare F P>F ES


Error 285 155.51 .55


Note. * P < .05

The Tukey output showed a statistically significant difference between the high


attitude mean toward the importance of aesthetics in teaching art with a mean difference

of .56. Also, there was a statistically significant difference between high job satisfaction

level group and the low job satisfaction level group with a mean difference of 1.13.

There was no statistical significant difference in the attitude means of the moderate job

satisfaction level group and the low job satisfaction level group with attitude means

difference of .57.

The groups’ highest attitude mean toward the importance of aesthetics (M = 4.33,

SD = .72) was held by the high job satisfaction level group. The moderate job satisfaction

level group had the moderate attitude mean (M = 3.77, SD = .93). The low job

satisfaction level group had the lowest attitude mean toward the importance of aesthetics

with a mean of (M = 3.20, SD = .63).

84


Chart 11


Due to the Participants’ Job Satisfaction Level

5 -

4 .5 -

o 4 -

0)£4->W0)<o

3 .5 -

C<00)2

3 “

2 .5 -




Art criticism

Regarding art criticism, the one-way ANOVA test results showed that the three

groups’ attitude means toward the importance of art criticism significantly differed based

on the independent variable of job satisfaction. The main effect (F = 20.67, p < .001)

was statistically significant at an alpha level of < .05 with a small effect size of .13.

85


Table 21

One-Way Analysis o f Variance fo r Importance o f Art Criticism Due to the participants’

Job satisfaction Level

DfSum of Square

MeanSquare F P>F ES


Error 285 198.38 .70


Note. * P < .05

The Tukey test determined a statistically significant difference between the high


attitude mean toward the importance of art criticism in teaching art with a mean

difference of .66. In addition, there was a statistically significant difference between the

high job satisfaction level group and the low job satisfaction level group with a mean

difference of 1.40. The moderate job satisfaction level group’s attitude mean was

significantly higher than the low job satisfaction level group’s with attitude means

difference of .73.

The high job satisfaction level group significantly scored a higher mean of

attitude toward the importance of art criticism in art teaching (M = 4.20, SD = .81) than

the moderate job satisfaction level group (M = 3.53, SD = .90). The low job satisfaction

level group had the lowest attitude mean toward the importance of art criticism with a

mean of (M = 2.80, SD = 1.03).

86


Chart 12

A Distribution o f the Participants’ Mean o f Attitude Toward the Importance o f Art

Criticism Related to The Participants’ Job Satisfaction Level

5 “

4 .5 -

4 -

< 3 .5 “

3 -

2 .5 -




Research Question Two

The second research question aimed to examine the Arkansas State K-4 grade

elementary art teachers’ level of implementation of the state’s three visual art standards

using a 5-point Likert-type scale, (i.e., 1 represents the lowest implementation and 5

represents the highest implementation). In addition, this research question sought the

statistical significant differences in the means of the dependent variable of

87


implementation based on selected independent variables including, years of teaching

experience, educational level, holding a degree in art, confidence regarding the subject

knowledge, and the level of job satisfaction. Independent-sample t tests and one-way

analysis of variance (ANOVA) tests were conducted to answer research question two. In

addition, Tukey (HSD) post-hoc analysis was used with the significant ANOVA test

results to determine the significant differences that occurred among the groups’ means of

implementation.

The Participants’ Implementation of the Arkansas State’s Visual Arts Standards

Table 22, indicates the art teachers’ overall implementation mean of standards

one, two and three. Visual art standard two has the highest mean of implementation (M =

4.14, SD = .69). Then, visual art standard one with implementation mean of (M = 4.12,

SD = .60). Finally, visual art standard three with an overall sample’s implementation

mean of (M = 3.98, SD = .69).

Table 22

Participants Overall Means o f Arkansas State Visual Arts Standards

Mean SD

Visual Art Standard-One 4.12 .60

Visual Art Standard-Two 4.14 .69

Visual Art Standard-Three 3.98 .69

88


Hypothesis Six

There are differences among Arkansas elementary art teachers’ implementation

of the state’s visual arts standards due to the Arkansas elementary art teachers’ year of

teaching experience.

To test hypothesis six, a one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) test was used to

examine if there were statistically significant differences in the dependent variable, mean

of implementation, due to the independent variable, participants’ years of experience.

Participants were classified in three groups regarding their years of teaching experience,

1-7 years, 8-15 years, and 16 and more years.

Visual Art Standard 1, 2, and 3

For the implementation of standard one, ANOVA test indicated no statistical

significant differences among the three groups’ mean of implementation. The main

effect (F = .05, p = .95) was not statistically significant at an alpha level of < .05. In

addition, ANOVA test indicated that there was not a statistically significant difference

among the groups’ implementation means of standard two (F = ,5 l ,p = .60). Finally,

there were no statistically significant differences among the groups’ means of standard

three implementation indicated by ANOVA test result at an alpha level grater than .05 (F

= 1.26, p = .28). The null hypothesis was retained for research hypothesis six.

89


Hypothesis Seven

There are differences between Arkansas elementary art teachers’

implementation of the state’s visual arts standards based on the Arkansas elementary

art teachers’ educational level.

To test the research hypothesis seven, an independent-sample t test was run to

determine if there was a statistically significant difference in the two groups’

implementation mean due to the independent variable of educational level, Bachelor’s,

and Master’s.

Visual Art Standard 1, 2, and 3

The independent-sample t test result indicated that there was no statistically

significant difference in standard one implementation mean of the Bachelor’s (M = 4.10,

SD = .59) and Master’s (M = 4.15, SD = .62) with p > .05. In addition, the t-test results

indicated no statistically significant difference between the Bachelor’s (M = 4.10, SD =

.70) and the Master’s (M = 4.22., SD = .69) groups’ mean of standard two

implementation with p > .05. Moreover, there was no statistical significant difference

between the Bachelor’s (M = 3.92, SD = .70) and the Master’s (M = 4.10., SD = .63)

groups’ mean of standard three implementation with p > .05. The null hypothesis was

retained for hypothesis seven.

90


Hypothesis Eight


implementation of the state’s visual arts standards based on whether the Arkansas

elementary art teachers hold degrees in teaching art.

An independent-sample t test was run to test the research hypothesis eight to

determine if there was statistically significant difference in the two groups’

implementation means due to the independent variable of holding and not holding a

degree in teaching art.

Visual Art Standard 1

The independent-sample t test output in table 23 determined a statistically

significant difference in standard one implementation mean between the group of

participants who held degrees in teaching art (M = 4.20, SD = .52) and the group of

participants who did not hold degrees in teaching art (M = 3.95, SD = .70) with a

significant t value of (t = 3.08, p < .002) with a large effect size of .41. The null

hypothesis was rejected at an alpha level of p < .05.

Table 23

Independent Sample t test fo r Standard One Implementation Mean Based on Having a




.25* 3.08* .002* .41


Note. * P < .05

91



For standard two, the independent-sample t test output indicated the group of

participants who held degrees in teaching art significantly had higher implementation

mean of standard two (M = 4.27, SD = .58) than the group of participants who did not

hold degrees in teaching art (M = 3.87, SD = .81) with a significant t value of (t = 4.35, p

< .001). The null hypothesis was rejected at an alpha level of p < .05. The effect size

was large (.57).

Table 24

Independent Sample t test fo r Standard Two Implementation Mean Based on Having a




.40* 4.35* .000* .57


Note. * P < .05


Regarding standard three, the independent-sample t test output determined a

statistically significant difference in the groups’ implementation means. Participants who

held degrees in teaching art (M = 4.08, SD = .63) tended to implement standard-three in

their art teaching more than the group of participants who did not hold degrees in

teaching art (M = 3.78, SD = .75). The t value was significant at (t = 3.49, p < .001) with

a large effect size of .42. The null hypothesis was rejected at an alpha level of p < .05.

92


Table 25

Independent Sample t test fo r Standard Three Implementation Mean Based on Having a




.30* 3.49* .001* .42


Note. * P < .05

Hypothesis Nine


of the state’s visual arts standards based on the Arkansas elementary art teachers’

knowledge confidence level o f teaching art.

To test hypothesis nine, a one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) test was

conducted to examine if there were statistically significant differences in the dependent

variable, mean of implementation, due to the independent variable, participants’

knowledge confidence level. Participants were classified in three groups regarding their

knowledge confidence level of teaching art, high, moderate, and low. A Tukey (HSD)

post-hoc analysis was conducted with the significant ANOVA result to determine

significant differences between the groups’ implementation means of the three state

visual art standards.


One- way ANOVA test result determined statistically significant differences

among the three groups’ standard one implementation mean. The main effect (F = 25.44,

93


p < .001) was statistically significant at an alpha level of <.05 with a small effect size of

.15.

Table 26

One-Way Analysis o f Variance fo r Implementation o f Standard One Based on Teaching

Art Knowledge Confidence Level

dfSum of Square

MeanSquare F P>F ES

Knowledge Confidence Level

2 15.72 7.86 25.44* .000* .15

Error 284 87.77 .31


Note. * P < .05

Tukey (HSD) post-hoc analysis was run to show the significant difference of

between groups’ mean of standard one implementation in teaching art. The Tukey results

indicated that the high knowledge confidence level group significantly had a higher mean

of standard one implementation than the moderate knowledge confidence level group

with a mean of difference of .30. In addition, the high knowledge confidence level group

significantly had a higher mean of standard one implementation than the low knowledge

confidence level group with a mean of difference of 1.03. Moreover, the moderate

knowledge confidence level group and the low knowledge confidence level group

significantly differed in their standard one implementation mean with a mean difference

of .73.

The high knowledge confidence level group significantly had the highest mean of

standard-one implementation (M = 4.27, SD = .47). The moderate knowledge

94


confidence level group came second with the moderate implementation mean among the

groups (M = 3.97, SD = .66). Finally, the low knowledge confidence level group had the

lowest implementation mean among the groups (M = 3.24, SD = .67).

Chart 13

A Distribution o f the Participants’ Mean o f State Visual Art Standard-One Based on

Teaching Art Knowledge Confidence Level

5 .00 -

4 .50 -

I 4 .00 -TJ<0■oc(0

3 .50 -oc<0<DS

3.00“

2 .50-

2.00Low M o d era te H igh




Regarding the participants’ implementation level of the state visual art standard-

two, the one-way ANOVA test results determined statistically significant differences

among the three groups’ standard-two implementation means. The main effect (F =

95


32.09, p < .001) was statistically significant at an alpha level of <.05 with a small effect

size of .18.

Table 27

One-Way Analysis o f Variance fo r Implementation o f Standard Two Based on Teaching


dfSum of Square

MeanSquare F P>F ES


2 25.74 12.87 32.09* .001* .18

Error 284 113.88 .40


Note. * P < .05

The Tukey (HSD) post-hoc analysis was used to show the between group

significant difference of the mean of standard two implementation in teaching art. The

Tukey results showed that the high knowledge confidence level group had a significantly

higher mean of standard two’s implementation than the moderate knowledge confidence

level group with a mean of difference of .48. In addition, the high knowledge confidence

level group had a significantly higher implementation mean of standard two than the low

knowledge confidence level group with a mean difference of 1.15. Moreover, the

moderate knowledge confidence level group and the low knowledge confidence level

group significantly differed in their standard two implementation mean with a mean

difference of .67.


standard two implementation (M = 4.36, SD = .52). Then the moderate knowledge

96





Chart 14

A Distribution o f the Participants’ Mean o f State Visual Art Standard Two Based on


5.00-

4.50-

OJI 4.00“

3.50-

3.00-

2.50-

2.00Low Moderate High




For the participants’ implementation level of the state visual art standard three,

the one-way ANOVA test result determined statistically significant differences among

the three groups’ implementation means due to the participants’ teaching art confidence

level. The main effect (F = 22.99, p < .001) was statistically significant at an alpha level

of <.05 with a small effect size of .14.

97


Table 28

One-Way Analysis o f Variance fo r Implementation o f Standard Three Based on Teaching


DfSum of Square

MeanSquare F P>F ES


2 18.84 9.42 22.99* .000* .14

Error 284 115.91 .41


Note. * P < .05

The Tukey result showed that the high knowledge confidence level group

significantly had a higher mean of their implementation of standard three than the

moderate knowledge confidence level group with a mean difference of .46. In addition,

the high knowledge confidence level group significantly had a higher mean of standard-

three implementation than the low knowledge confidence level group with a mean

difference of .85. There was no statistical significant difference between the moderate

knowledge confidence level group and the low knowledge confidence level group in their

implementation mean of standard three with a mean difference of .39.


standard three implementation (M = 4.18, SD = .57). Then the moderate knowledge




98


Chart 15

A Distribution o f the Participants’ Mean o f State Visual Art Standard-Three Based on


5.00-

4.50-

coI 4.00-■O

™ 3.50-

3.00-

2.50-

2.00M oderate HighLow


(Low = Moderate < High)

Hypothesis Ten

There are among Arkansas elementary art teachers’ implementation of the

state’s visual arts standards based on the Arkansas elementary art teachers’ job

satisfaction level.

A one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) test was conducted to test hypothesis

tine and examine if there were statistically significant differences in the dependent

variable, means of implementation, due to the independent variable, participants’ job

satisfaction levels. Participants were classified in three groups regarding their

satisfaction level of being art teachers, high, moderate, and low. Tukey (HSD) post-hoc

99


analysis was conducted with the significant ANOVA results to examine between group

significant differences in the mean of the three state visual art standards implementation.

Visual A rt Standard 1

One- way ANOVA test results determined statistically significant differences

among the three groups’ standard one implementation means. The main effect (F =


size of .15.

Table 29

One-Way Analysis o f Variance fo r Implementation o f Standard One based on the

Participants’ Job Satisfaction Level

dfSum of Square

MeanSquare F P>F ES

Job Satisfaction level

2 15.31 7.66 25.44* .000* .15

Error 284 88.18 .31


Note. * P < .05

A Tukey (HSD) post-hoc analysis was run to show the significant difference

between the groups’ means of standard one implementation. The Tukey results

determined that the high job satisfaction level group significantly had a higher mean of

standard-one implementation than the moderate job satisfaction level group with a mean

difference of .59. In addition, the high job satisfaction level group significantly had a

higher mean of standard-one implementation than the low job satisfaction level group

with a mean difference of .84. There was no statistical significant mean difference

100


between the moderate job satisfaction level group and the low job satisfaction level group

in their standard one implementation.

The high job satisfaction level group significantly had the highest mean of

standard-one implementation (M = 4.21, SD = .53). Then, the moderate job satisfaction

level group came second with implementation mean of (M = 3.61, SD = .72). The low

job satisfaction level group had the lowest implementation mean among the groups (M =

3.37, SD = .67).

Chart 16

A Distribution o f the Participants’ Mean o f State Visual Art Standard One Based on the

Participants ’ Job Satisfaction Level

5 .00-

4 .50-

I 4 .00 -

■o

" 3 .50-

3 .00 -

2 .50 -




101



Regarding the implementation means differences among the groups’

implementation means of standard two due to the independent variable of job satisfaction

levels, the one-way ANOVA test results determined statistically significant differences

among the three groups’ standard two implementation means. The main effect (F =


size of .18.

Table 30

One-Way Analysis o f Variance fo r Implementation o f Standard Two Based on the


DfSum of Square

MeanSquare F P>F ES


2 25.68 12.84 32.00* .000* .18

Error 284 113.94 .40


Note. * P < .05

The Tukey result determined that the high job satisfaction level group

significantly had a higher implementation mean of standard two than the moderate job

satisfaction level group with a mean of difference of .77. In addition, the high job

satisfaction level group significantly had a higher mean of standard-two implementation

than the low job satisfaction level group with a mean of difference of 1.10. There was no

statistical significant mean difference between the moderate job satisfaction level group

and the low job satisfaction level group in their implementation mean of standard two.

102


The high job satisfaction level group significantly had the highest mean of

standard-two implementation (M = 4.25, SD = .61). Then, the moderate job satisfaction

level group came second with implementation mean of (M = 3.49, SD = .79). While the

low job satisfaction level group had the lowest implementation mean among the groups

(M = 3.15, SD = .63).

Chart 17

A Distribution o f the Participants’ Mean o f State Visual Art Standard Two Based on the


5 .00-

4 .50-

CMI 4 .00-

JJJ 3 .50 -

3 .00 -

2 .50 -




103



For the significant differences among the groups’ implementation means of the of

standard-three based on the independent variable of job satisfaction level, the one-way

ANOVA test results showed statistically significant differences among the three groups’

standard-three implementation means. The main effect (F = 17.27, p < .001) was

statistically significant at an alpha level of <.05 with a small effect size of .11.

Table 31

One-Way Analysis o f Variance fo r Implementation o f Standard Three Due to the


dfSum of Square

MeanSquare F P>F ES


2 14.54 7.27 17.11* .000* .11

Error 284 120.21 .42


Note. * P < .05

The Tukey result determined that the high job satisfaction level group

significantly had a higher implementation mean of standard three than the moderate job

satisfaction level group with a mean difference of .58. Moreover, the high job

satisfaction level group significantly had a higher implementation mean of standard three

than the low job satisfaction level group with a mean difference of .83. There was no

statistical significant mean difference between the moderate job satisfaction level group

and the low job satisfaction level group in their implementation mean of standard three.

104


The high job satisfaction level group had the highest mean of standard three

implementation (M = 4.06, SD = .64). Then, the moderate job satisfaction level group

came second with implementation mean of (M = 3.48, SD = .71). The low job

satisfaction level group had the lowest implementation mean among the groups (M =

3.23, SD = .74).

Chart 18

A Distribution o f the Participants’ Mean o f State Visual Art Standard Three Based on the


5 .0 0 -

4 .5 0 -

<0I 4 .0 0 -

(0■DC<s(0ocma>£

3 .5 0 -

3 .0 0 -

2 .5 0 -

2.00L o w M o d e ra te H ig h



105


Participants’ Comments on the Standards

Item 56 in the questionnaire asked for the participants’ opinions of other

objectives they may see important to be added to the standards. Seventy-six participants

(26%) answered this item. The participants gave valuable comments about the visual art

standards and suggested some objectives. A participant suggested that students should

“develop an understanding of why people in all cultures create art or have a need to

create art.” For another participant, visiting art exhibitions outside of the school setting

was considered as very important for enriching students’ art knowledge. In addition, a

participant suggested an additional objective that refers specifically to Arkansas art

history and local artists. It was indicated that the standards need to place more emphasis

on drawing skills. Another participant stated that standards need to focus on and include

“more computer graphics and technology.”

The participants commented on the state visual art standards in terms of their

clarity, lack of examples, and what needed to be emphasized more. In terms of the clarity

of the state visual art standards, there were comments indicated that the standards need

more details and examples. A participant with 16-years or more of teaching experience

stated that “Some of the standards are confusing. When the standards were first created

in our state, they were clear (they make sense). Now, they seem to be wordy and lofty”.

The participants concluded that “I’m frustrated with the wording of the standards. I need

a workshop on understanding them.” A participant indicated that “I do find it very

difficult to implement content standard 3 to K-2 students.”

Some participants provided suggestions for clarifying the standards. A participant

commented that “many of the existing objectives should, perhaps, be made more

106


specific.” A participant thought that it would help if some objectives were more specific

in terms of giving examples of appropriate learning activities and media for every grade

level, “what types of media or processes should be used for each grade level.” A

participant commented that there was a need for “more examples of activities for each

objective. Also, more detailed objectives for elements and principles of art and cultures.”

A curriculum guide was suggested to provide more understanding of the standards “My

district could do more to help us with a better curriculum guide that meets state

frameworks” a participant stated. Other participants even would like to have standards

for each grade level, “I would like to see some specific standards for each individual

grade level so I can help the students practice and develop skills for good art making.”

For some participants the state visual arts standards do not satisfy their need of knowing

how to implement them, “I do not always get what I need from the state standards.”

Other participants stated that the standards need to be specific and designed in a

logical way according to grade level “I would personally like to see a skill list for each

grade level K-4 to see a logical progression of skills would be very helpful.” Another

participant commented “I believe there should be more specific guidelines about

elements and principles as well as developmentally appropriate skills.” A sequential art

program was considered important for K-4 grade students “students in grades K-4 should

study art in a sequential program that introduces art concepts that are added to each year.”

Some participants thought that standards are adequate, but the lack of time was a

difficulty that prevents the appropriate implementation of the standards “the standards in

place are adequate but they are very difficult to carry out and keep up with in elementary

art classes when you see students have 40 minutes art class a week”. Another participant

107


stated that “I wish we had more time allotted for each class, 60 minutes instead of 40

minutes to adequately use our lesson plans and allow more time for clean up and refilling

supplies for the next class. Sometimes it becomes difficult to prepare and clean up

between classes.” In addition to lack of adequate time for art classes, other participants

complained about the large class size number as another obstacle of implementing the

state visual arts standards, “I teach a total of over 800 students! That is too many. I am

overwhelmed and feel I could be a better art teacher if a smaller student body to teach.”

Some participants stated that adequate art funding and supplies would help in better

implementation of the arts standards in teaching “Funding and supplies would help a lot

more.”

Another participant suggested that aesthetics and criticism should be less

emphasized in teaching art, yet she thought that they are important to be introduced as

concepts during art activities. This participant thought that aesthetics and criticism are

mastery for students, “I don’t feel mastery is necessary.” Criticism for another

participant “discourage criticism of fellow students art” thinking that “at this young age,

students should be encouraged praised and supported in all aspects of art.”

Some participants highlighted the importance of some objectives in the standards.

One participant insisted on the importance of relating and connecting art to other subjects

“yes, relate art to core subjects where possible math, science, and language arts.”

Another participant thought it was very important for students to “understand and

evaluate how creating art develops problem solving and other higher level thinking skills

in all disciplines.”

108


Summary

Chapter IV provided an analysis of the study data and examination of the research

hypotheses. The two major research questions for this study were answered; question

one sought the Arkansas K-4 grade art teachers’ attitudes toward the four foundational

disciplines of discipline-based art education (DBAE), and question two sought the extent

to which Arkansas K-4 grade art teachers implemented the state visual arts standards.

Associated subsidiary questions were also tested in the chapter.

The participants’ demographic information revealed that participants in this study

were K-4 grade art teachers from the five regions of Arkansas State, Central, Northwest,

Southwest, Northeast, and Southeast. Most of the participants were females (90%) and a

small percentage of them were males (10%). The majority of the participants were

certified (85%) and permanent (99%) art teachers.

For professional preparation, 20% of the participants did not have any courses

related to art education in their in-service training. The remaining percentage of the

participants had courses that related to art education. Regarding the level of professional

reading, 69% of the participants read often about art education, 28% read rarely, and only

3% never read about art education.

For the participants’ confidence regarding their knowledge about teaching art,

59% of the participants had high level of confidence, 37% had moderate level, and only

4% had a low level of confidence. The majority of the participants (86%) were highly

satisfied with their job as art teachers, ten percent of the participants had a moderate

satisfaction level, and only four percent had low level of job satisfaction.

109


Regarding the data of the four foundational disciplines of DBAE, art making was

the most introduced art discipline (100%) in the art classrooms among the four

disciplines. Art history was second (93%), aesthetics was third (85%), and art criticism

was the least introduced subject (83%).

For the research hypotheses related to the participants’ attitudes toward the

importance of the foundational disciplines of DBAE, research hypothesis two was

accepted. There were statistically significant differences between the participants’

attitude means based on whether or not having a degree in art. Participants who were

specialists in teaching art had higher mean of attitude toward the importance of the four

foundational discipline of DBAE more than participants who were not art specialists.

Research hypothesis three was accepted, indicating statistically significant

differences among the participants’ means of attitude toward the importance of the four

art disciplines of DBAE based on the participants’ professional reading level.

Participants who read often about teaching art tended to have higher attitude toward the

importance of the four foundational disciplines than the participants who rarely or never

read about their subject. Moreover, a positive statistically significant difference was

found in the attitude means of the participants who rarely read about their subject and the

participants who never read.

In addition, research hypothesis four was accepted determining statistically

significant differences in the participants’ means of attitude based on their knowledge

confidence of each discipline. Participants who had higher confidence levels tended to

have higher attitude means toward the importance of each discipline of the DBAE.

110


Moreover, research hypothesis five was accepted indicating statistically

significant differences among the participants’ attitude means based on job satisfaction

level. It was found that participants who had higher job satisfaction levels have higher

attitude mean toward the importance of each foundational discipline of DBAE than

participants who had lower job satisfaction levels.

Regarding the research hypotheses related to the participants’ implementation

level of the state visual arts standards; hypothesis testing revealed that hypothesis eight

was accepted. The participants who had degrees in teaching art education significantly

had higher mean of standards implementation than the participants who did not have

degrees in art.

Moreover, research hypothesis nine was accepted indicating statistically

significant differences in the mean of standards implementation based on the participants’

confidence level of knowledge about teaching art. The participants who had high level of

knowledge confidence significantly had higher implementation mean of the three visual

arts standards than the participants who had moderate and low confidence levels. In

addition, the participants who had moderate level of knowledge confidence had

significantly higher mean of standards one and two than the participants who had a low

knowledge confidence level. There were no statistically significant differences in

standard-three implementation means between the moderate and low confidence level

groups.

Finally, research hypothesis ten was accepted indicating significant differences in

the standards implementation means due to the participants’ job satisfaction level. The

participants who had high job satisfaction level significantly had a higher mean of the

111


three standards implementation than the participants who had moderate and low job

satisfaction. There was no statistically significant difference between the implementation

mean of the three standards for participants with moderate and low job satisfaction levels.

112


CHAPTER V

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION

The purpose of this study was to examine Arkansas K-4 grade elementary art

teachers’ attitudes toward the four foundational disciplines of discipline based art

education (DBAE), art making/studio art, art history, aesthetics, and art criticism.

Moreover, this study aimed to examine the art teachers’ implementation of Arkansas

State visual art standards in their instruction. Research questions and hypotheses were

developed to explore the association between the study’s dependent variables and

independent variables.

Data for this study were collected through a 56-item survey questionnaire mailed

to a population of 570 K-4 grade art teachers in Arkansas State. Two hundred and ninety

two questionnaires were returned representing a 51% rate of response. Independent-

sample t test and one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) tests were conducted to

analyze the study’s data.

The study determined the factors that affected Arkansas elementary art teachers’

means of attitudes toward DBAE. These variables included, having a degree in teaching

art, professional reading level, knowledge confidence level of the DBAE subjects, and

job satisfaction level. In addition, factors as holding degree in teaching art, knowledge

confidence level of teaching art, and job satisfaction level were determined to have

effects on AR elementary art teachers’ means of state visual art standards’

implementation in instruction.

This chapter provides the discussions of the study’s findings, implications, and

recommendations. This chapter presents first the summary of the findings, discusses the

113


study’s hypotheses testing, and reports the theoretical implications; then it provides and

discusses the recommendations. Suggestions for future research are provided at the end

of this chapter.

Summary of Findings

This section reports and discusses the information about Arkansas K-4 grade art

teachers including, demographic profiles, journal reading, professional reading,

confidence level of teaching art, and job satisfaction.

Demographic Information

The majority of the art teachers were females (90%) and only (10%) were males.

It may be concluded that most of Arkansas K-4 grade teachers are females. In terms of

years of teaching experience, the two largest groups of the teachers had either 1-7 or 18

years or more of teaching experience (37% and 36%). Twenty seven percent of the art

teachers had between 8 to 15 years of experience. These percentages may imply that

Arkansas K-4 grade art teachers are almost evenly distributed among the years of

teaching experience groups.

For the teachers’ school region, almost one-third of the art teachers (29%) were

from Central Arkansas. The second region that most art teachers were from was

Northwest Arkansas (26%). The Northeast region came third with a percentage of

(21%). The frequency of these three regions teachers accounted for (75%) of the total

number of art teachers in the study. The Southeast and Southwest regions had the lowest

number of art teachers who participated in the study with (12%) for each region.

Regarding the participants’ educational level, almost three quarters of the K-4

grade art teachers who participated in the study had a Bachelor’s degree (69%), while

114


31% of them had a Master’s degree. In addition, two thirds of the art teachers (66%) had

degree in teaching art education; thirty four percent of the art teachers did not.

In terms of certification, the majority of the art teachers were certified teachers

(85%), and the non certified art teachers were (15%). Moreover, almost of all the art

teachers were permanent regular teachers (99%), while only (1%) of the art teachers who

participated in the study were permanent substitute teachers.

Professional Preparation and Reading

The art teachers varied in terms of their in-service training hours directed to art

education. There were five groups; the first group had 20% of art teachers who had 0 in-

service training hours per school year directed to art education; the second group had

21% of art teachers who had 1-10 hours; then, the largest percentage of the art teachers

(26%) were in the third group with 11-20 hours; the fourth group had 21% of the art

teaches who had 21-30 hours; finally, the fifth group had the lowest percentage of the art

teachers (10%) who had in their in-service training 31 or more hours directed to art

education.

In terms of journal reading, almost two thirds of Arkansas K-4 grade art teachers

who participated in the study read art journals, while more than one third of them do not

read journals in art. Half of the art teachers read the journal of Art Education (51%).

Studies in Art Education journal was read by (16%) of the art teachers journal readers.

The Journal of Aesthetics was the least readjournal, which only (3%) of the art teachers

read. Almost a third of the art teachers indicated that they read other journals.

For the art teachers level of professional reading, more than two thirds (69%) of

the art teachers often read about teaching art. Approximately one fourth (28%) of the

115


teachers rarely read about teaching art; while only 3% of the art teachers never read about

teaching art.

Knowledge Confidence and Job Satisfaction

Regarding the subject knowledge confidence, more than a half (59%) of Arkansas

K-4 grade art teachers who participated in the study had a high level of confidence, more

than a third (37%) of them had a moderate level of confidence, and only a few of the art

teachers (4%) had a low level of confidence for their subject knowledge. It may be

implied that specialist art teachers have more confidence in their art teaching than

generalist classroom teachers who teach art. Seventy seven percent of the specialist art

teachers were highly confident in their knowledge about art compared to twenty five

percent of general teachers who teach art education were highly confident in their art

knowledge. McKean (2001) interviewed 12 general art teachers who were teaching art in

elementary schools. Those teachers participated in the teacher development component

of the arts partnership program. McKean stated that:

For the teachers in this study, recurrent statements such as “I can't draw” or “I can't sing” reflected this sense of inadequacy and lack of talent that impeded their own experimentation within the art forms and their confidence in teaching the arts to their students. As one teacher said, “I can't teach what I can't do. If I had the talent to do it, I would.” (p. 28).

In this study 34% of the art teachers did not have a degree in teaching art. It is

important for general classroom teachers to have a deep understanding of all subjects

they teach, including art. Taylor (1977) confirmed that “ .. .art teachers (and for this

mater all teachers) should have deep awareness in many fields, so that their specialty, if it

is art, comes across with deep understanding because of their interdisciplinary

involvement.” (p. 38)

116


Job satisfaction is defined as “a pleasure or positive emotional state resulting from

the appraisal of one’s job or job experience” (Locke, 1976, p. 1304). Another definition

of job satisfaction is the cognitive and affective reaction’s contribution to the differential

perceptions of what an employee prefers to have in the job compared to what he/she

actually has (Cranny, Smith, & Stone, 1992). The majority of the Arkansas K-4 grade

teachers (86%) were highly satisfied with their job as art teachers. Only a few of the art

teachers (10%) were moderately satisfied with their job, while the lowest percent (4%) of

the art teachers were low in their satisfaction of being art teachers. There have been

studies that attempted to explore the sources for teachers’ job satisfaction. It was found

that teachers were satisfied with their job when it involves working with children with

whom teachers spend sufficient time. An additional source of teachers’ job satisfaction

was the intellectual challenge of teaching, autonomy, and independence. The factors for

job dissatisfaction included, how teachers are viewed by society, low pay, and work

overload (Spear et al., 2000).

Introducing and Preferring Taking a Course in Each foundational Discipline of

DBAE

In terms of introducing the four foundational disciplines of DBAE in the lesson

instructions of Arkansas K-4 grade art teachers, art making/studio art was introduced in

the art lessons of all the art teachers who participated in this study. In addition, art

making was the only discipline that had the complete percentage of implementation

(100%) among the four disciplines. Art history came second in terms of implementation

with (93%), then aesthetic with (85%), and finally, art criticism with (83%). It appeared

that the art teachers perceive art making as the most important discipline among the four

117


disciplines. In addition, art history, aesthetics, and art criticism were introduced in art

lessons by most of the art teachers.

For taking a course in each discipline, (85%) of the art teachers would like to take

a course in art making, while (15%) would not. Art history had the highest percent

among the four foundational disciplines where most of the art teachers (93%) wanted to

take a course in art history, while only a few did not (7%). Seventy-six percent of the art

teachers would like to take a course in aesthetics and (24%) would not. Finally, a course

in art criticism was preferred to be taken by 73% of the art teachers. Twenty-seven

percent of the art teachers would not like to take a course in art criticism.

Discussion

Research Questions and Hypotheses Testing

This section discusses the study’s research questions and provides the results of

hypotheses testing. The independent-sample t-test and one-way ANOVA tests used in

this study determined that there were statistically significant differences in means of

attitude toward the importance of the four foundational disciplines of DBAE based on the

independent variables of having a degree in teaching art, professional reading level,

knowledge confidence level of the DBAE subject, and job satisfaction level. Moreover

the statistical tests revealed that there were statistically significant differences in the

implementation mean of the state’s visual art standards based on the independent

variables of having a degree in teaching art, professional reading level, confidence level

of knowledge about teaching art, and job satisfaction level.

118


Research Question One

Research question-one sought the attitudes of Arkansas K-4 grade elementary art

teachers toward the four discipline foundations of discipline- based art education

(DBAE): art making/studio art, art history, aesthetics, and art criticism. It aimed to

examine if there were statistically significant differences in the mean of attitude toward

DBAE due to selected independent variables of educational level, holding a degree in art,

level of professional reading, confidence regarding the subject knowledge, and the level

of job satisfaction.

The Importance of Each Discipline

A 5-point Likert-type scale (i.e., 1-SD = strongly disagree, 2-D = disagree, 3-N =

no opinion, 4-A = agree, 5-SA = strongly agree) was used to explore the art teachers

attitudes toward the importance of including each foundational disciplines of DBAE in

art instructional units. Data revealed that art teachers valued the importance of the four

disciplines. Most of the art teachers (87%) strongly agreed about including art making in

art units. It may be implied that art teachers value art making much more than the other

three disciplines because of the historical focus on art making over the others art

disciplines. According to Dobbs (1998), since art appeared in school curriculum it:

followed the predictable path of utilitarian necessity In the nineteenth century theevolution of the American work ethic placed a premium on drawing skills, whether for the purpose of acquiring job skills to work in a factory, to sketch portraits, or simply to encourage good penmanship and hand-eye coordination” (p. 17).

Art history came second where more than half of the art teachers (59%) strongly

agreed about its importance in teaching art; aesthetics was the third discipline that less

than a half of the art teachers (41%) strongly agreed about its importance; finally, only

119


one third (37%) of the art teachers strongly agreed that criticism was important discipline

to be added in their art lesson units.

Hypothesis One

There are differences in Arkansas elementary art teachers’ mean of attitude

toward the importance the four foundational art disciplines o f DBAE, Art

Making/Studio Art, Art History, Aesthetics, and Art criticism based on the art teachers’

education level.

The independent-sample t-test used to determine the significant difference

between the art teachers’ attitude means based on education level indicated that there

were no statistically significant differences in art teachers, with Master’s and art teachers

with Bachelor’s degree, attitude means toward the importance of the four foundational

disciplines of DBAE.

Hypothesis Two


means toward the importance the four foundational art disciplines of DBAE, Art

Making/Studio Art, Art History, Aesthetics, and Art criticism based on whether or not

the Arkansas elementary art teachers hold a degree in teaching a r t.

Results of the statistical test were consistent with the study’s predictions. There

were statistically significant differences between the art teachers means of attitude toward

art making based on whether having a degree in teaching art or not. The art teachers who

hold degrees in teaching art tended to perceive art making, art history, aesthetics, and

criticism as important disciplines to be included in teaching art more than the art teachers

who do not have degree in art.

120


Hypothesis Three


means toward the importance the four foundational art disciplines of DBAE, Art

Making/Studio Art, Art History, Aesthetics, and Art criticism based on the Arkansas

elementary art teachers’ professional reading level.

To test the statistical difference one-way ANOVA test was used. The art teachers

were divided into three groups according to their professional reading level. There were

statistically significant differences among the three groups’ attitude means. Art teachers

who read often about teaching art tended to have higher attitude toward the importance of

the four foundational disciplines than the art teachers who rarely or never read about their

subject. In addition, it was found that teachers who rarely read about their subject

significantly had higher attitude mean toward the importance of making art, art history,

aesthetics, and art criticism than the art teachers who never read.

Hypothesis Four


means toward the importance of the four foundational art disciplines o f DBAE, Art


elementary art teachers’ subject knowledge confidence.

There were statistically significant differences among the art teachers’ means of

attitude toward the importance of art making, art history, aesthetics, and art criticism

when they were separated into three groups according to their knowledge confidence

level of each subject. Art teachers who had high subject knowledge confidence level

tended to have the highest attitude mean toward the importance of each discipline among

121


the three groups. Then, the art teachers who had moderate level of subject knowledge

confidence came second. Finally, the art teachers who had low level of knowledge

confidence had the lowest attitude mean toward the importance of each subject.

Hypothesis Five

There are differences in the Arkansas elementary art teachers’ attitude means



elementary art teachers’ job Satisfaction Level.

There were statistically significant differences among the art teachers attitude

toward the importance of making art, art history, aesthetics, and art criticism based on the

art teachers job satisfaction level. Art teachers were asked if they felt that they were

satisfied for being art teachers. Art teachers who had a high level of job satisfaction

significantly had a higher attitude mean than art teachers who have moderate and low job

satisfaction level. The attitude mean difference between art teachers who had a moderate

job satisfaction level and art teachers who had a low job satisfaction level was not

statistically significant.

Research Question Two

The second research question is discussed in this section. This research question

aimed to explore to what extent Arkansas State K-4 grade elementary art teachers

implemented the state’s three visual arts standards in their art unit instruction. Standard

One has expectations about the development of K-4 grade students’ concepts and ideas

through the processes of inquiring, exploring, and discovering a variety of references

such as, historical, cultural, social, environmental, and personal references. Standard

122


Two has objectives that aim to develop students’ creativity skills by manipulating a wide

variety of media, techniques, processes, and tools to develop original works of art and

design. Standard Three has objectives that aim to help K-4 grade students to respond to

artworks and concepts of self, of others, of environment, and cultures.

Research question two also sought the statistically significant differences in the

mean of implementation due to selected independent variables including, years of

teaching experience, educational level, holding a degree in art, teachers’ confidence level

regarding subject knowledge, and the level of job satisfaction. An independent-sample t-

test and one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) test were conducted to test the five

research hypotheses associated with the question. Moreover, a Tukey (HSD) post-hoc

analysis was used with the significant ANOVA test results to determine the significant

differences that occurred among the groups’ implementation means.

The Arkansas Elementary Art Teachers’ overall Implementation of the Arkansas

State’s Visual Arts Standards

It was found that the Arkansas K-4 grade students highly implemented the three

standards in their lesson instruction. Visual art standard two was implemented most by

the art teachers. The visual art standard one came second in level of implementation, and

finally, visual art standard three was the least implemented standard.

123


Hypothesis Six


of the state’s visual arts standards due to the Arkansas elementary art teachers’ year o f

teaching experience.

The art teachers were categorized in three groups according to their years of

teaching experience, 1-7 years, 8-15 years, and 16 and more years. The one-way

ANOVA test indicated no statistically significant differences among the three groups’

means of the three standards implementation

Hypothesis Seven


implementation of the state’s visual arts standards based on the Arkansas elementary

art teachers’ educational level.

The independent-sample t-test used to test this hypothesis indicated that there

were no statistically significant differences between the three standards implementation

means of art teachers who had bachelor’s and Master’s degrees, even though, teachers

with Master’s degree had the higher implementation mean.

Hypothesis Eight


implementation of the state’s visual arts standards based on whether the Arkansas

elementary art teachers hold degrees in teaching art.

Art teachers with degree in teaching art significantly had higher means of

implementation of the three standards than art teachers with no degree in teaching art.

For art teachers who had degrees in art, standard two had the highest mean of

124


implementation (4.27), then standard-one with an implementation mean of (4.20), and

finally standard three had the lowest implementation mean (4.08). Regarding art teachers

who did not have degrees in teaching art, standard one had the highest mean of

implementation (3.95), then, standard two (3.87), and standard three has the lowest mean

of implementation (3.78).

Hypothesis Nine


of the state’s visual arts standards and the Arkansas elementary art teachers’

knowledge confidence level of teaching art.

The one-way analysis of variance test results indicated that there were statistically

significant differences among the art teacher’s mean in their implementation of the state’s

visual art standards in their art instruction. The art teachers were divided into three

groups based on their knowledge confidence level of teaching art where highly confident

art teachers significantly implemented the three standards more than the moderate and

low confident art teachers. In addition, the moderately confident art teachers group

significantly implemented standards one and two more than the low confident art

teachers. There was no statistically significant difference between the moderate

knowledge confidence and the low confidence groups in their implementation means of

standard three.

125


Hypothesis Tine

There are among Arkansas elementary art teachers’ implementation of the

state’s visual arts standards based on the Arkansas elementary art teachers’ job

satisfaction level.

There were statistically significant differences among the means of Arkansas K-4

grade elementary art teachers in their implementation of the state’s visual art standards

based on the teachers’ job satisfaction level. The art teachers who highly satisfied with

being art teachers significantly implemented the three standards in their art unit

instruction more than the art teachers who had moderate or low levels of job satisfaction.

The three visual art standards’ implementation means difference of the art teachers who

had moderate and low job satisfaction levels was not significant.

Art Teachers Opinion about the AR State Visual Arts Standards

The art teachers suggested some additional objectives that might be added to the

standards. Understanding the reasons and cultural context behind creating art was

thought to be important objective that needed to be added. In addition, another objective

that refers to Arkansas State art history and artists was suggested. Art teachers

recommended that the visual arts standards have more focusing on graphics and

technologies as well as visiting art museums and exhibitions out of the school as ways for

enriching the students understanding of art.

The art teachers differed in their opinions about the state visual arts standards in

terms of their clarity and sufficiency. Some art teachers indicated that providing more

details and examples for art activities and media that may be used with each standard

would help in better implementation of the standards. Furthermore, some art teachers

126


thought that there was a need for providing examples of art activities that are appropriate

for each grade level for each objective. The art teachers’ comments reflect the need for

in-service training programs that include training on how to implement the visual arts

standards in teaching. “When the strategies and objectives are unclearly stated and

understood, it would be difficult to evaluate how well they have been realized or to

identify what needs to be improved” (McLaughlin & Thomas, 1984, p. 6).

The need for specific art standards designed in a cumulative way according to

grade level suggesting appropriate skills and learning activities was mentioned by the art

teachers as a need for the visual arts standards. An art teacher indicated the need for

specific guidelines about the skills and activities. Another art teacher commented that a

sequential art program was considered important for K-4 grade students to provide the art

concepts for each grade level. As indicated in the literature, DBAE provides a sequential

written curriculum that ensures cumulative and appropriate art development for each

grade level. According to DiBlasio (1987) like other academic subjects, DBAE provides

a sequential written curriculum helping students to move from one grade-level to another

with age-appropriate learning tracks and reinforced lessons (Dobbs, 2004). Selecting art

units and learning activities according to the teachers’ preference will not ensure the

scope and sequence plan.

The art teachers stated some obstacles they had that prevent them from sufficient

implementation of the state visual arts standards in their lesson instructions. The current

art class period for elementary schools is 40 minutes a week, which the art teachers

commented that it was insufficient for implementing the art standards in the lesson

instructions. Sufficient time helps teachers to deliver their lessons and reach the aimed

127


educational goals. According to Hope (1999), sufficient time is very important to reach

specific goals in education; however, “In most K-12 settings, the arts do not have time-

on-task parity... In too many schools the time accorded to arts study does not afford the

possibility of developing the basics” (p. 4).

In addition, some art teachers complained about their class size number indicating

that teaching a small number of students would help better teaching. For other art

teachers in this study, their implementation of the visual arts standards was affected by

the lack of sufficient funding. Sufficient funding and supplies for art programs were

believed to improve art teaching. According to Fong (1998), art is usually based on

media exploration and studio production that typically depend on the amount of available

fund for purchasing art supplies, materials, and equipment; as a result, funding issues

would affect classroom practices. When asked about which factor most affect their art

teaching, 31% of teachers in poor districts said “funding”. In addition, funding was the

factor that most affects art teaching of 17% of art teachers in wealthy districts. Fong

(1998) added that art teaching in elementary schools that experience funding issues

tended to emphasize traditional two-dimensional approaches that require less expensive

supplies and materials over three-dimensional approaches which are very under

represented.

Finally, some art teachers’ commented about the objectives in the visual art

standards that introduce aesthetics and art criticism revealed the need for more details and

providing examples of how to apply aesthetics and art criticism to K-4 grade students. It

seems that criticism is looked at in a negative way thinking that art criticism means

showing the class students’ artworks and giving judgments about their quality “good or

128


bad.” However, for K-4 grade students, art criticism could be implemented by exposing

students to model artworks and help students to explore and understand how the elements

and principles of art are implemented in the art work. This negative perception about

aesthetics and art criticism may have occurred as a result of what Dobbs (1992)

explained, “Typically, teacher-preparation programs have primarily involved studio

courses with only a token amount of art history and virtually no attention to the

disciplines of art criticism and aesthetics” (p. 47).

Implications

Fifteen percent of the art teachers in this study were not certified. According to

Act 1506 of 2001, all public elementary schools, 1-6 grade, by the year 2005 were to

provide music and visual art taught according to the state frameworks by certified

teachers in music and art. The law also required elementary schools to teach art and

music no less than one hour a week (State of Arkansas, 2001). However, Act 245 of

2005 revised Act 1506 by reducing the one-hour minimum requirement of art and music

per week to 40 minute. It was indicated in Act 245 that art and music should be taught

according to the state visual art and music frameworks by certified teachers in those areas

or non-certified teachers. That was to give school districts sufficient time to respond to

the Act 1506 by hiring staff, arranging schedules, allocating space, and purchasing

supplies (State of Arkansas, 2005). Kindergarten teachers were not indicated in both acts

in terms of certification. This study sample included kindergarten teachers who teach art,

so it may be implied that a great proportion of the 15% non-certified teachers in this

study were uncertified kindergarten teachers.

129


Results of this study indicated that Arkansas K-4 grade elementary art teachers

highly perceive the importance of the four foundational disciplines of DBAE. Therefore,

it may be implied that this will help in successful DBAE implementation in Arkansas

state elementary schools. The majority of the art teachers highly perceived the

importance of art making more than art history, aesthetics, and art criticism. It may be

implied that there are factors led to the high perception of the importance of art making

over the other art disciplines, and the historical focus on art making as the core discipline

of art was one of those factors. In addition, it may be implied that the art teachers’

professional training was much devoted to art making over the other three art disciplines.

According to Robert (1988), for K -12 art programs, art production has been the

“mainstay.” In addition, art making courses occupy most of teaching art accreditation

requirement courses:

Accreditation standards implied by the National Association of Schools of Art and Design (NASAD) recognize the importance of studio production in the education of art teachers. NASAD recommends a professional undergraduate degree with a heavy concentration in studio work as the basic entry-level requirement for art teachers. This Bachelor of Fine Arts degree should have approximately half of the courses required for the degree completed in the studio area. (Robert, 1988, p. 22)

It may be implied that other art disciplines including art history, aesthetics, and art

criticism need to be more emphasized in art teachers’ professional training programs.

Arkansas elementary art teachers’ implementation level of the three visual art

standards was high. The implementation mean of each standards varied which may

imply that there are factors that may affect each standard’s implementation, such as

teachers’ understanding of a standard content or availability of art and teaching supplies

needed to implement a standard. It was found that 27% of the art teachers had no hours

of in-service training directed to teaching art education, which may be implied to have an

130


effect on the art teachers’ understanding of their subject and ways of teaching it.

Therefore, a specific in-service training program emphasizing art education may be

needed for art education teachers. Art teachers commented that some objectives in the

standards did not give ways of possible implementation in the lesson instruction.

Detailed examples of implementing standards may be needed to be added to the state

visual arts frameworks. Art teachers also need to have workshops that specifically teach

them how to put the standards into practice in their classrooms.

Limitations

1) This study’s results only apply directly to Arkansas K-4 grade art teachers of the

year 2005-2006.

2) The study’s sample size (288) was large enough to be statistically representative

for a population of 570. However, sometimes a survey’s respondents may be only

those who are interested in the study’s topic leading to non-response bias, which

means that the study sample is not representative for all the population.

3) Surveys depend on the technique of self report to obtain information from

individuals. A survey may have external validity threats that make the study’s

sample unrepresentative of the population when participants tend to give answers

not because they reflect their true opinions, but because they think that those

answers would meet what the researcher wants, and when participants have

inaccurate memories for past events (Kirk, 1995).

4) Visual arts frameworks used in this study were Arkansas visual arts frameworks

for the year 2001.

131


5) The effect size of some variables was low effect (less than .25) indicating that

factors outside the study also may be making differences in the outcomes.

Recommendations

This study concludes with recommendations for the school districts and future

studies. Regarding the recommendations for the school districts, an art class of 40

minutes a week is not enough for teaching art; therefore, increasing the class time is

needed for teachers to properly implement the art standards in their art lessons. The

number of hours of in-service training that the art teachers take in teaching art was

considerably insufficient. Therefore, districts should provide more workshops and

training programs that focus on preparing art teachers on how to teach and implement the

standards. It is also important to mention that providing general elementary teachers who

teach art with sufficient training in art and exposing them to art courses would support

them with deep understanding of the subject. Large class size was a concern for some art

teachers; districts should seek ways of hiring more art teachers. Moreover, it is important

for art programs to have sufficient funding to provide students with the necessary art

media to do the art activities and achieve the standards goals; districts should seek

funding for the art programs from sources such as agencies and corporate foundations.

Finally, for the recommendations for future studies, this study indicated that the

majority of Arkansas K-4 elementary art teachers highly perceived and valued art making

as the most important discipline compared to their perception about aesthetics and art

criticism which were the least important. It may be needed to explore why Arkansas

elementary art teachers undervalued these two art disciplines. It also may be needed to

study the proportions of implementing art making, art history, art criticism, and aesthetics

132


in teaching. A follow-up study may be needed to determine the actual implementation of

the standards and the causes of differences in the proportion of standards implementation

as well as examining the teachers’ understanding of each standard’s content and the ways

the teachers use to implement them in their lesson instruction. Issues such as insufficient

training hours, insufficient funding, and large class size, were concerns indicated by

Arkansas elementary art teachers. A study may be needed to examine these factors actual

effect on the quality of art teaching as well as seeking suggestion for decreasing these

factors effects. Finally, a study may be needed to explore the relationship between job

satisfaction/confidence of professional knowledge and performance.

Conclusions

The purpose of this study was to explore the Arkansas K-4 grade elementary art

teachers’ attitudes toward the four foundational disciplines of discipline-based art

education (DBAE) to determine their acceptance of the approach. This study also sought

the factors that may influence the art teachers’ attitudes. These factors included years of

educational level, holding a degree in art, level of professional reading, confidence of

subject knowledge, and the level of job satisfaction. It was found that Arkansas

elementary art teachers in general perceived highly the importance of the four disciplines;

however, aesthetics and criticism had the least attitude means which may be due to the

lesser amount of introduction of these subjects in the teachers’ professional training

programs. It may be needed to emphasize more art history, aesthetics, and art criticism in

the professional training programs for teachers to understand these disciplines and find

ways to implement them in their lesson instructions. Factors as, holding a degree in art,

level of professional reading, confidence of subject knowledge, and the level of job

133


satisfaction, were found to have influence on the art teachers’ attitudes toward the

disciplines of DBAE. Before implementing a teaching approach such as DBAE,

teachers’ attitude and acceptance of such an approach is very important for successful

implementation. Results of this study indicated a high perception and attitude toward the

four foundational disciplines of DBAE which may indicate a successful implementation

of DBAE if applied in Arkansas elementary schools.

Another purpose of this study was to examine the Arkansas K-4 grade elementary

art teachers’ level of implementation of the state’s three visual arts standards in the lesson

instructions. The study’s results indicated a high level of implementation, as reported by

the participants, of three visual arts standards. Data in this study may be used as

statistical reference data about the status of the state visual arts standards implementation

in Arkansas elementary schools. Visual art standard two had the highest level of

implementation, then visual art standard one came second, finally, visual art standard

three had the lowest level of implementation. This study also sought the significant

differences in the means of the dependent variable of implementation based on selected

factors including, years of teaching experience, educational level, holding a degree in art,

confidence regarding the subject knowledge, and the level of job satisfaction. Art

teachers with degrees in art tended to implement the three standards more than the art

teachers with no degrees in art. In addition, art teachers who were highly confident in

their professional knowledge tended to implement the three standards more than art

teachers who had moderate and low levels of professional knowledge confidence. It was

also found that art teachers with high job satisfaction level tended to implement the three

134


standards in their instruction more than the art teachers with moderate and low levels of

job satisfaction.

Arkansas K-4 grade teachers’ implementation of the three visual arts standards

may be considered acceptable; however, the teachers’ comments about the clarity of the

standards suggested providing more detailed examples and ways for each standard’s

implementation at each grade. These results may reflect what DBAE theorists suggested

for art curriculum to be a sequential educational process that provides appropriate

learning according to the students’ ages and needs. These comments may indicate that

leaving designing art units to the teachers’ preferences does not ensure that the general

goals will be accomplished. There is need for written art curriculum that provides lesson

examples that includes the knowledge, skills, and educational goals for each grade level.

These lessons may be used as reference that guides art teachers who can develop different

art lessons and units, but they should include the required knowledge and skills in the

lesson examples. The written lessons will help provide appropriate learning for each

grade level and help avoiding the learning redundancy and ensure that students acquire

new art knowledge and skills. It would help in evaluation and determining what goals are

or are not accomplished.

In conclusion, for art education to provide appropriate art knowledge and skills to

students and to have good evaluation of what educational goals being achieved, there is a

need for teaching approaches and written curriculum for each grade level that systematize

art teaching processes and instruction; and this is a purpose for which DBAE was

developed.

135


References

Arkansas State Department of Education (2001). Arkansas Fine Arts Curriculum Framework. Little Rock, AR. Retrieved February 13, 2006, from http ://arkedu. state. ar .us/curriculum/benchmarks .html# Arts

Arkansas State Department of Education (2001). Initial Licensure. Little Rock, AR. Retrieved February 15, 2006, from http://arkedu.state.ar.us/teachers/initial_licensure.html

Arkansas State Department of Education (2001). Competency Area- Art. Little Rock, AR. Retrieved February 15, 2006, from http://arkedu.state.ar.us/teachers/competency_areas.html

Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, Inc.

Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise o f control. New York: W.H.Freeman Publishers.

Barnes, E. (1903). Two child study papers. Kindergarten Magazine, 16, 26-31.

Black, S. (1996). Discipline-based arts education: 'A rt smart' and a lot more.Education Digest, 62(4), 60-65. Retrieved February 12, 2006, from http://search.epnet.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&an=9701164240&loginp age=login.asp

Cranny, C. J., Smith, R. C., & Stone, E.F. (1992). Job satisfaction: How people feel about

their jobs and how it affects their performance. New York: Lexington.

Delacruz, E., & Dunn, P. (1996). The evolution of discipline-based art education.Journal o f Aesthetic Education, 30(3), 67-82.

Dewey, J. (1934). Art as experience. New York: Minton, Balch & company.

DiBlasio, M. (1987). Reflections on the theory of discipline-based art education.Studies in Art Education, 28(4), 221-26.

Dobbs, S. (1992). The DBAE handbook: An overview o f discipline-based art education. Santa Monica, CA: Getty Center for Education in the Arts.

Dobbs, S. (2004) Discipline-based art education. In E. Eisner & M. DayHandbook o f research and policy in art education (pp. 701-724). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

136


http://arkedu.state.ar.us/teachers/initial_licensure.html

http://arkedu.state.ar.us/teachers/competency_areas.html

http://search.epnet.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&an=9701164240&loginp

Dobbs, S. (1998). Learning in and through art. Los Angeles: The Getty Education Institute for the Arts.

Dreeszen, Craig, & Comp (2001). Teaching Partnerships: Report o f National Forum on Partnerships Improving Teaching o f the Arts. Washington, DC. Arts Education Partnership

Duke, L. (1988). The Getty Center for Education in the Arts and discipline-based art education. Art Education, 41(2), 7-12.

Dwaine, G., & Silverman, R. (1988). Making art important for every child. Educational Leadership, 45(4), 10-15.

Efland, A. (1990). A history o f art education: Intellectual and social currents in teaching the visual arts. New York: Teachers College Press.

Efland, A. (1983). Art education during the great depression. Art Education, 36(6), 38- 45

Efland, A. (1984). Curriculum concept of the Penn State Seminar: An evaluation in retrospect. Studies in Art Education, 25(4), 205-211.

Eisner, E. (1987). On discipline-based art education: A conversation with Elliot Eisner.Educational Leadership, 45(4), 6-10.

Eisner, E. (2002). The arts and the creation o f mind. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Erickson, M. (1986) Teaching aesthetics K-12. In S. Dobbs & R. MacGregor (Eds.)Research readings fo r discipline-based art education: A journey beyond creating (pp. 148-161). Reston, VA: U.S. National Art Education Association.

Feldman, E. (1970). Becoming human through art. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Fong, N. I. (1998). A survey o f elementary teachers' art teaching in Southern California. Unpublished master's thesis, California State University, Los Angeles.

Glass, G., & Hopkins, K. (1996). Statistical methods in education and psychology (3rd ed). Needham Heights, MA: A Simon & Schuster Company.

Greer, D. (1984). Discipline-based art education: Approaching art as a subject of study. Studies in Art Education, 25(4), 212-218.

Hope, S. (1999). Time, distance, focus, excellence. Arts Education Policy Review,100( 6) , 2- 10.

137


Kern, E. (1987). Antecedents of discipline-based art education. Journal o f Aesthetic Education, 27(2), 35-56.

Kirk, R. (1995). Experimental design: Procedures fo r the behavioral sciences (3rd ed.). Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole Publishing Company.

Lawler, E. Ill (1973). Motivation in work organizations. Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole Pub. Co.

Locke, E. A. (1976). The nature and causes of job satisfaction. In M. D. Dunnette (Ed.), Handbook o f industrial and organizational psychology (pp. 1297-1349). Chcago: Rand McNally.

Lowenfeld, V. (1957). Creative and mental growth, (3rd ed). New York: Macmillan.

McLaughlin, M., & Thomas, M. (eds.) (1984). Art history, art criticism, and artproduction: An examination o f art education in selected school districts, Volumes I, II, III. Santa Monica, CA: The Rand Corporation.

McKean, B. (2001). Concerns and considerations for teacher development in the arts.Arts Education Policy Review, 102(4) 27-33.

Mitchell, M., & Jolley, J. (1992). Research design explained (2nd ed.). Orlando FL: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich Publishers.

Robert, E. (1988). Retention in art teacher education programs. Design fo r Arts in Education, 89(4), 21-24.

Silverman, R., (1989). Discipline-based art education. The Education Digest, 55(2), 53- 56.

Severance, K. (2005). General teaching. Arts & Activities, 136(5), 24-64.

Smith, P. (1996). The history o f American art education. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.

Smith, R. (2002c). The new pluralism and discipline-based art education. Arts Education Policy Review, 104(1), 11-17. Retrieved July 8, 2006, from http://search.epnet.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&an=7401831&loginpage =login.asp

Spear, M., Gould, K., & Lee, B. (2000). Who would be a teacher? A review o f factors motivating and demotivating prospective and practicing teachers. NFER Slough, England.

138


http://search.epnet.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&an=7401831&loginpage

Stafford, M. (1985). An assessment o f Arkansas high school art programs using National Art Education Association standards. A Ph.D. dissertation, University of Arkansas.

Stankiewicz, M. (2000). Discipline and the future of art education. Studies in Art Education, 41(4), 301-313.

State of Arkansas (2001). Act 1506 of 2001. Retrieved November 20, 2006 from w w w. arkleg. state. ar. u s/ftproot/acts/2001/htm/ act 1506.pdf

State of Arkansas (2005). Act 245 of 2005. Retrieved November 20, 2006 from www.arkleg.state.ar.us/ftproot/acts/2005/public/act245.pdf

Stinespring, J., (1992). DBAE and criticism. Art Education Policy Review, 94(2), 20- 26. Retrieved February 12, 2006, fromhttp://search.epnet.com/login. aspx?direct=true&db=aph&an=9302250367&loginp age=login.asp

Swanger, D. (1990). Discipline-based art education: heat and light. Educational Theory, 40(4), 437-442.

Taylor, A. (1977). Who shall teach art to children? Art Education, 30(6), 38.

Teague, B. (1986). An assessment o f Arkansas middle school/junior high school art programs using art education association standards. A Ph.D. dissertation, University of North Texas.

Triche, P. (2004). Attitude toward and frequency o f use o f discipline-based art education among John Paul Getty Institute trained educators. A Ph.D. dissertation, the University of Mississippi.

U.S. Department of Education. A Nation at Risk. Retrieved February 8, 2006 from http://www.ed.gov/pubs/NatAtRisk/risk.html

Wilson, B. (1997). The quiet evolution: Changing the face o f arts education. Los Angeles: The Getty Education Institute for the Arts.

Winslow, L. (1939). The integrated school art program. New York: London, McGraw- Hill.

Young, J., & Adams R. (1991). Discipline-based art education: Can it save art in our schools? Clearing House, 65(2), 99-102.

139


http://www.arkleg.state.ar.us/ftproot/acts/2005/public/act245.pdf

http://search.epnet.com/login

http://www.ed.gov/pubs/NatAtRisk/risk.html

Appendixes

140


Appendix A

Survey Cover Letter (Principal’s Letter)

141


UNIVERSITY BARKAN S AS

Mr./Mrs.Schools Name StreetCity, State Zip Code

Month Day, 2006

Dear Mr./Mrs.:

As a part o f my dissertation at The University of Arkansas, I am conducting a survey designed to be completed by K-4 art teachers. The data collected from this survey will be used for my doctoral dissertation entitled Arkansas Elementary Art Teachers ’ Attitudes toward Discipline- Based Art Education and their Implementation o f the State’s Visual Art Standards. The survey was reviewed and approved by the Institutional Review Board (IRB) at The University of Arkansas.

I will be grateful if you give the enclosed survey to the K-4 art teacher or the classroom teacher who teaches art education at your school.

If you have any question or concern, please do not hesitate to contact me at the phone number and email address given at the bottom of this letter. Further, you may also contact the chair of my research committee, Dr. Michael Wavering at (479) 575-4283 or email: [email protected]. In addition, the study results will be available to you on request.

I really appreciate your valuable time, and I would like to thank you for your cooperation in making this study successful.

Best regards,

H- /?•

Mohammad Aldosari

Ph.D. Candidate Curriculum & Instruction University of Arkansas Phone: (479) 000-000 e-mail: [email protected]

142


mailto:[email protected]


Appendix B

Survey Cover Letter (Art Teacher’s Letter)

143


UN1VERSITWARKANSAS

Dear Art Specialist/ Classroom Teacher:

Please take a moment to read this letter. I would like your expertise in completing the attached voluntary survey. The data collected from this survey will be used to collect data for my Ph.D. research concerning Arkansas elementary art teachers’ attitudes toward discipline-based art education and their implementation of the state visual arts standards.

The survey was reviewed and approved by the Institutional Review Board at The University of Arkansas. Your name and your school’s name will be kept secretly confidential, and will not be published in written materials associated with the study.

The survey questions should take you approximately 15 to 20 minutes. Please note that the questions are typed on both front and back of the survey paper.

After you fill out the survey, please put it in the enclosed envelope and send it back by Month 14th. The recipient address and postage are already available on the envelope.

Your participation is very important in gathering the data for this study, If you have any question or concern, please do not hesitate to contact me at the phone number and email address given at the bottom of this letter. Further, you may also contact the chair of my research committee, Dr. Michael Wavering at (479) 575- 4283 or email: [email protected]. The results of this survey will be analyzed and reported in the dissertation, and the final results will be available to you on request.

I really appreciate your valuable time, and I would like to thank you for your cooperation in making this study successful.

Best regards,

H- f\-Mohammad Aldosari

Ph.D. Candidate Curriculum & Instruction University of Arkansas Phone: (479) 000-000 e-mail: [email protected]

144




Appendix C

Survey

145


Please place a check mark by the appropriate answer

UNIVERSITY BARKAN SASs s k h b u e s

1) Your gender is:O Female O Male

2) Your years of teaching experience are between:O 1-7 O 8-15 O 16+

3) The region in which your school is located in the state is best described as:O Central O Northeast O Southeast O Northwest O Southwest

4) The highest educational degree you currently hold is:O Less than a Bachelor’s O Bachelor’s O Master’sO Other __________________

5) Do you have a degree in teaching art?O Yes O No

6) Are you a certified art teacher?O Yes O No

7) Your current employment status is:O Temporary substitute (assigned on a daily basis)O Permanent Substitute (assigned on a regular term basis)O Regular teacher (permanent teacher)

8) How many hours of your in-service training per school year have been directed toward art education?Please, write a specific number of hours in the box

9) You read the following art education journals: O Art EducationO Journal of Aesthetics Education O Studies in Art Education

146


O Other(s) (please specify) O None

10) How often do you read about teaching art?O Never O Rarely O Often

11) You believe that the confidence level of your knowledge about teaching art is:O High O Moderate O Low

12) “You like being an art teacher”. To what level is this statement true:O High O Moderate O Low

DIRECTIONS (items 13-24) include questions regarding your background of the four discipline foundations of discipline-based art education (DBAE).

The First discipline of (DBAE) is Art making or Studio art (which is using tools and techniques to create artistic objects).

13) Select the level of confidence with your knowledge about Studio Art:O High O Moderate O Low

14) Do you introduce Studio Art in your instructional art units?O Yes O No

15) Would you like to take courses in Studio Art?O Yes O No

The Second discipline of (DBAE) is Art History which means teaching students about the art objects’ historical, social, and cultural contexts.

16) Select the level of confidence with your knowledge about Art History:O High O Moderate O Low

17) Do you introduce Art History in your instructional art units?

147


O Yes O No

18)) Would you like to take courses in Art History?O Yes O No

The Third discipline of (DBAE) is Aesthetics, which is a scanning process helps students to understand the nature and quality of art to be able to make and justify judgments about it initiating the process of art criticism.

19) Select the level of confidence with your knowledge about Aesthetics:O High O Moderate O Low

20) Do you introduce Aesthetics in your instructional art units?O Yes O No

21) Would you like to take courses in Aesthetics?O Yes O No

The Fourth discipline of (DBAE) is Art Criticism, which means helping students to analyze, interpret, and evaluate qualities of artworks for the purpose of understanding and giving judgment about works of art.

22) Select the level of confidence with your knowledge about Art Criticism:O High O Moderate O Low

23) Do you introduce Art Criticism in your instructional art units?O Yes O No

24) Would you like to take courses in Art Criticism?O Yes O No

148


DIRECTIONS (items 25-28) include questions regarding your opinion of the importance of the four discipline foundations of discipline-based art education. Please read each item carefully and circle the level that indicates your opinion according to the scale below.

1- Strongly disagree 2- Disagree 3- No opinion 4- Agree 5- Strongly agree

SD

D N A SA

25) It is important to include art making (which is using tools and techniques to create artistic objects) in your art instructional unit. 1 2 3 4 5

26) It is important to include Art history (which means teaching students about the art objects’ historical, social, and cultural contexts) in your art instructional unit.

1 2 3 4 5

27) It is important to include Aesthetics (which is a scanning process helps students to understand the nature and quality of art to be able to make and justify judgments about it initiating the process of art criticism) in your art instructional unit.

1 2 3 4 5

28) It is important to include Art criticism (which means helping students to analyze, interpret, and evaluate qualities of artworks for the purpose of understanding and giving judgment about works of art) in your art instructional unit.

1 2 3 4 5

Please Continue

V

149


DIRECTIONS (items 29-55) include elementary school K-4 student learning expectations in the visual art class. These items are derived from the Arkansas State Visual Arts Standard (K-4). Please read each item carefully and circle the level that indicates your expectation of each standard in your lesson instruction according to the scale below.

GRADES K-4 C o n t e n t S t a n d a r d 1:Inquire/Explore/DiscoverStudents will inquire/explore/discover historical, cultural, social, environmental, and personal references from which to develop concepts/ideas.

In jour art instruction vou expect jour students to:Np t a ta l j l 2 3 4 5 y

29) Examine art and communicate ideas and feelings using the language of art which shall include art elements and principles. 1 2 3 4 5

30) Explore skills associated with media and processes including, but not limited to, color mixing, tearing, folding, and gluing. 1 2 3 4 5

31) Distinguish parallels (i.e., elements, principles, themes, culture, material, processes and methods) between art created by students and artists from different times and places. 1 2 3 4 5

32) Discover examples of how people use art in their daily lives, in the work place, and within the community. 1 2 3 4 5

33) Explore careers in art. 1 2 3 4 5

34) Discover and record through technology (computer, video, photocopier, camera, and/or overhead, etc.) a variety of art examples and related resources. 1 2 3 4 5

35) Identify, practice, and follow health and safety standards in the use of tools, materials, and processes. 1 2 3 4 5

36) Recognize and apply responsible practices (reduce/reuse/recycle) to protect the natural/man-made environment. 1 2 3 4 5

37) Investigate the relationship among the arts and other disciplines. 1 2 3 4 5

150


GRADES K-4 CONTENT STANDARD 2:CreateStudents will use their creativity in a wide variety of media, techniques, processes, and tools to develop original works of art and design.

In jour art instruction jo u expect jour students to:Not.at all.. 1.... 2 3 .. 4 5 Verj much

38) Use creative problem solving, critical thinking skills, and various resources to select subject matter, symbols, and ideas to communicate meaning. 1 2 3 4 5

39) Transfer ideas and feelings to others through original works of self-expression using art elements and principles. 1 2 3 4 5

40) Demonstrate that change for improvement is a part of problem solving in art and that there can be more than one solution. 1 2 3 4 5

41) Create a project (e.g., performance, product, discussion) that shows how art is used in daily life, the work place, or the community. 1 2 3 4 5

42) Exercise responsible use of tools/technology and materials to produce art works that may include, but are not limited to, painting, drawing, printmaking, sculpture, clay/ceramics, architecture, graphic design, fiber arts, and digital imagery.

1 2 3 4 5

43) Produce art works to demonstrate an understanding of the various purposes for creating (aesthetic, functional, historical/cultural, therapeutic and/or social). 1 2 3 4 5

44) Create art work in response to past, present, and future situations.1 2 3 4 5

45) Create art works based upon previous explorations/discoveries that demonstrate the relationships between art and culture. 1 2 3 4 5

46) Collaborate to create through a variety of methods (small and whole groups, interdisciplinary, etc.). 1 2 3 4 5

151


G R A D E S K -4 CONTENT STANDARD 3:Reflect/Respond/RediscoverStudents will reflect upon, respond to, and rediscover the art work and concept of self, of others (past and present), of environments, and of diverse cultures.

In jour art instruction jo u expect jour students to:Not a t a l l 2...3...4.5..Verj much

47) Understand and relate how art is used to communicate ideas and feelings to others. 1 2 3 4 5

48) Evaluate and assess, individually/collaboratively, throughrevisions, journals, and/or critiques, the characteristics and merits of an individual’s art work and of the work of others.

1 2 3 4 5

49) Develop aesthetic awareness by discussing (e.g., rationalization, critique, evaluation) the integrity of an individual’s art work. 1 2 3 4 5

50) Exhibit art work and participate in the exhibition process (e.g., selection, planning, display, judging, promotion). 1 2 3 4 5

51) Build and assess a collection of student work in a portfolio (e.g., individual, classroom, grade level, technological). 1 2 3 4 5

52) Recognize and acknowledge that artists/students develop individual styles. 1 2 3 4 5

53) Examine and respond to the use of art in daily life and community. 1 2 3 4 5

54) Analyze and discuss the relationship among the arts and other disciplines. 1 2 3 4 5

55) Recognize the importance of art history and heritage. 1 2 3 4 5

56) Are there other objectives you think need to be added to the K-4 state visual arts standard? Please write them down

152


Appendix D

Arkansas State Visual Arts Standards (revised 2001)

153


C o n t e n t S t a n d a r d 1:Inquire/Explore/DiscoverStudents will inquire/explore/discover historical, cultural, social, environmental, and personal references from which to develop concepts/ideas.

Grades K-4 (Student Learning Expectations)

A. 1.1. Examine art and communicate ideas and feelings using the language of art which shall include art elements and principles.

A. 1.2. Explore skills associated with media and processes including, but not limited to, color mixing, tearing, folding, and gluing.

A. 1.3. Distinguish parallels (i.e., elements, principles, themes, culture, material, processes and methods) between art created by students and artists from different times and places.

A. 1.4. Discover examples of how people use art in their daily lives, in the work place, and within the community.

A .1.5. Explore careers in art.A. 1.6. Discover and record through technology (computer, video, photocopier, camera,

and/or overhead, etc.) a variety of art examples and related resources.A. 1.7. Identify, practice, and follow health and safety standards in the use of tools,

materials, and processes.A. 1.8. Recognize and apply responsible practices (reduce/reuse/recycle) to protect the

natural/man-made environment.A. 1.9. Investigate the relationship among the arts and other disciplines.

Assessment Legend: S: statewide; T: teacher-made tests; PO: portfolio; PR: project; C: checklist; O: observation; PE: performance; E: exhibition; D: demonstration; LJ: log/journal; W: writing.

C o n t e n t S t a n d a r d 2:CreateStudents will use their creativity in a wide variety of media, techniques, processes, and tools to develop original works of art and design.


A.2.1. Use creative problem solving, critical thinking skills, and various resources to select subject matter, symbols, and ideas to communicate meaning.

A.2.2. Transfer ideas and feelings to others through original works of self-expression using art elements and principles.

A.2.3. Demonstrate that change for improvement is a part of problem solving in art and that there can be more than one solution.

A.2.4. Create a project (e.g., performance, product, discussion) that shows how art is used in daily life, the work place, or the community.

A.2.5. Exercise responsible use of tools/technology and materials to produce art works

154


that may include, but are not limited to, painting, drawing, printmaking, sculpture, clay/ceramics, architecture, graphic design, fiber arts, and digital imagery.

A.2.6. Produce art works to demonstrate an understanding of the various purposes for creating (aesthetic, functional, historical/cultural, therapeutic and/or social).

A.2.7. Create art work in response to past, present, and future situations.A.2.8. Create art works based upon previous explorations/discoveries that demonstrate

the relationships between art and culture.A.2.9. Collaborate to create through a variety of methods (small and whole groups,

interdisciplinary, etc.).

Assessment Legend: S: statewide; T: teacher-made tests; PO: portfolio; PR: project; C: checklist; O: observation; PE: performance; E: exhibition; D: demonstration; LJ: log/journal; W: writing.

C o n t e n t S t a n d a r d 3:Reflect/Respond/RediscoverStudents will reflect upon, respond to, and rediscover the art work and concept of self, of others (past and present), of environments, and of diverse cultures.


A.3.1. Understand and relate how art is used to communicate ideas and feelings to others.

A.3.2. Evaluate and assess, individually/collaboratively, through revisions, journals,and/or critiques, the characteristics and merits of an individual’s art work and of the work of others.

A.3.3. Develop aesthetic awareness by discussing (e.g., rationalization, critique, evaluation) the integrity of an individual’s art work.

A.3.4. Exhibit art work and participate in the exhibition process (e.g., selection, planning, display, judging, promotion).

A.3.5. Build and assess a collection of student work in a portfolio (e.g., individual, classroom, grade level, technological).

A.3.6. Recognize and acknowledge that artists/students develop individual styles.A.3.7. Examine and respond to the use of art in daily life and community.A.3.8. Analyze and discuss the relationship among the arts and other disciplines.A.3.9. Recognize the importance of art history and heritage.

Assessment Legend: S: statewide; T: teacher-made tests; PO: portfolio; PR: project; C: checklist; O: observation; PE: performance; E: exhibition; D: demonstration; LJ: log/journal; W: writing. (Arkansas Department of Education, 2001, Fine Arts Curriculum Framework section).

155
