National Art Education Association

Let's Put It All Together: Compromise and CareAuthor(s): Julianne BiehlSource: Art Education, Vol. 25, No. 9 (Dec., 1972), pp. 14-15Published by: National Art Education AssociationStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3191739 .

Accessed: 15/06/2014 12:29

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

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

.

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

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 188.72.126.109 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 12:29:37 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Let's Put

ItAUl get~hene

nCo mpromise And Care

Julianne Biehl In art education today a problem exists which is similar to

the plight of the craftsman or artist. Kurt Rowland, author of the Looking and Seeing textbook series, has the following opinion:

The difference between artist and craftsman is only a question of emphasis. Both work within the living tradition in roughly the same way, using existing tenden- cies . . . and material... They are 'right" that is to say ef-

ficient, for the times and the community to which they belong. How do we in art education achieve a "rightness" and

"efficiency for our own times and communities? The challenge for our future success is dependent upon "an

enlightened, knowledgeable, and involved audience".2 In- formed judgment is necessary-from the planning of towns to the making of jewelry.3 It is the task of art education to promote the skills of awareness-visually, perceptually, and intellectually-which bring about this informed judgment.

Charles Dorn has recently pointed out that a most crucial concern for art education in the seventies is the fact that "an overwhelming majority of art educators across the nation neither understand nor know how to implement the disciplinary values advocated in the past decade".4 Ac- cording to him, the time for silence is over.

The steps advocated by Dorn include (1) acceptance of art forming as a mode justified in itself, which is accom- panied by critical and historical behaviors relevant to the art performance; (2) renovation of the art teacher education programs to include the clear identification of art processes from studio and art history classes, with the resultant under- standings being of the most effective procedures for im- plementation at all levels; and (3) change in the present en- vironment in which art is taught.5

I would like to propose directives which might help to achieve these goals. According to a recent study which I have made, I have concluded that because of humanizing trends prevalent today in education, there is evolving a favorable climate for a common philosophy of art education. Harlan Hoffa has said that art taught as humanism "could capture the minds of far more than the ten per cent of high school students, who enroll . . ." In fact, Vivienne Anderson believes that we should teach to reach the 100 per cent.7 The reason that so many students are convinced that they are inadequate as performers in art education has been determined by Edmund Feldman to be the direct result of our stress on creative powers.8 The true potential of art education, as I see it, was descriptively defined by Earl Linderman, when he referred to art as "a humanizing process, an aesthetic catalyst capable of opening up vast cultural vistas on the human plane".9

The theme for the Eleventh NAEA Biennial Conference at Dallas, Texas, was, as we all remember, "Art and Humanism". In introduction to the conference, then NAEA president, William Bealmer, stressed the human goal of education-"helping the person to become the best that he is able to become".10 To become his very best requires the development of abilities and skills which are both primary and secondary. The primary skills concern the adap- tation to and the mastery of the life situation. The secondary skills are involved with problem solving and subject mastery. To become his very best requires pupil exposure to knowledge and experiences which will equip him for in- telligent use of life with the accompanying ability to con- tinue learning and searching for answers long after his for- mal education years are over.11

I, as many others do also, agree with Abraham Maslow's statement that the model for rescuing the rest of the curriculum from impending meaninglessness might be "really effective education in the arts".12

The main roadblocks to a common philosophy of art education are conflicts of opinion, conflicts which are often merely a matter of semantics. A little give and take of opinion and stance could result in a compromise which could evolve into the much needed philosophy. A recent example of this was Vincent Lanier's apt rebuttal to Kenneth Lansing's statement that our objective was to produce "non- professional artists". As part of Lanier's argument was given the fact that since most of education in the public schools produces dilettante status, this is not too unrealistic an aim for art education also. Very good points were given by both authorities, but after deliberation of both opinions one is left with the belief that "nonprofessional artist" and "dilet- tante status" are in reality more compatible than they at first seem."13

This content downloaded from 188.72.126.109 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 12:29:37 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

I would like to propose a meeting ground for the com- promise of a common philosophy with a revised definition of art education as "an experience of total human growth14 and art awareness in the realms of cultural, environmental, and aesthetic education". As suggested by Reid Hastie, the teacher in this context first aids the student in what he wants to say and then in the technical means or instruction necessary to produce the visual statement.1s Response comes before doing, and the student grows in both the primary and secondary skills.

It is my opinion that the trends of art education today fall most naturally into the categories of cultural, environmen- tal, and aesthetic education. In Guidelines: Curriculum Development for Aesthetic Education Barkan, Chapman, and Kern state that the goals for an aesthetic education program in the general education program center around concern for (1) the individual-encouraging personal development, (2) the arts-transmitting cultural heritage, and (3) the environment-maintaining and transforming society.16 My adaptation of these concerns for all of art education includes (1) total human growth-personal development, (2) cultural education-transmitting and un- derstanding heritage of self and others, (3) environmental education-maintaining and transforming society, and (4) aesthetic education-developing sensitivities in all of the preceeding categories.

The role of the art teacher is expanding because of the aesthetic needs of a society in active response to its culture and environment. The result of this enlarged role could be an increased pride and status in the profession of art education. A change in the program of the preparation of prospective teachers, as suggested by Dorn, and a concer- ted effort to reeducate the present teachers are basic necessities to end the "time of silence" in art education.

The art teacher in the coming decades has been explained as one who will be competent in many fields: art studio processes, art history, art criticism, technologies of art, and the relationship of his field to the entire school curriculum.17 He or she will be the (1) means of obtaining the original art experience, (2) means of expanding the students beyond their own culture, and a (3) conveyor of the belief that art can transform and expand one's present culture and environment through aesthetic experience.18

Maxine Greene has beautifully summarized the im- plications of this for our future:

... I think the challenge to teachers of the arts is inescapable; because after all, it is we, particularly who are concerned with beautification and renewal, with opening the way for the creation of new and more fluid forms, with overcoming the resistance of materials so that metal and stone may be reshaped, creating a world that is humane.79 I would like to challenge the NAEA membership to take

on as part of its goals the reeducation of as many of the nation's art teachers as possible. The vast amount of literature and research information available through the auspices of the NAEA makes in-service education a viable reality, since reeducation can more rapidly be achieved through informed reading. An increased membership of art teachers in this professional organization could be a means of attaining a higher and more wide-spread level of up-to- date professional knowledge. It is my opinion that the NAEA can have an active and exciting part in raising the standards of art education to meet the changing demands of society. The natural result of this catalytic action could be a wider adoption of art education in the general education curriculum, since enlightened teachers would help speed up the "humanizing process"

Julianne Biehl is art teacher at Richardson North Junior High School, Richardson, Texas.

REFERENCES

1Kurt Rowland, Pattern and Shape: Notes for Teachers, Vol. I, Looking and Seeing, 4 vols. New York: Nostrand Co., 1969, p. 11.

2lbid, p. 14.

31bid. 4Charles M. Dorn, "Art Education: The Silent Seven-

ties?", Art Education, XXV, No. 1 (1972), pp. 26-27. 5lbid, pp. 27-28. 6Harlan Hoffa, "Art as Humanism", Art Education, XXIV,

No. 3 (1971), p. 9. 7Vivienne Anderson, "A New Priority: Arts and

Humanities", Art Education, XXIV, No. 3 (1971), p. 10. 8Edmund B. Feldman, Becoming Human Through Art,

Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1970, Preface, p. vi. "9Earl W. Linderman, Teaching Secondary Art, Dubuque,

Iowa: William C. Brown Company Publishers, 1971, p. 3. 10William Bealmer, "President's Message", NAEA

Program, Eleventh NAEA Biennial Conference, Dallas, Texas, April 4-9, 1971, p. 3.

'1Association for Supervision and Curriculum Develop- ment, Life Skills in School and Society, Louis J. Rubin, ed., Washington, D.C.: ASCD, NEA, 1969, pp. 19-20, 23-26.

12Nancy Hanks, "Education Through Art: A Gateway", Art Education, XXIV, No. 7 (1971), p. 12, quoting Abraham Maslow.

"13Kenneth M. Lansing, "Art Education Today: Its Nature and Its Needs", Art Education, XXIV, No. 2 (1971), p. 32. Vincent Lanier, "The Song is Over, But ...", Arts and Ac- tivities, Sept. 1971, p. 66.

14Vincent Lanier, Teaching Secondary Art, Scranton, Penna.: International Textbook Co., 1964, p. 23.

15Reid Hastie, "Reflections of a Past President", Art Education, XXIV, No. 6 (1971), p. 9.

16Manuel Barkan, Laura H. Chapman, and Evan J. Kern, Guidelines: Curriculum Development for Aesthetic Educa- tion, Aesthetic Education and Curriculum Program, Central Midwestern Regional Laboratory, 1970, p. 9.

"7Antony Swider, "The Art Teacher for the Seventies", Art Education, XXIV, No. 2 (1971), pp. 8-9.

"18Maxine Greene, "Popular Culture, The Arts, and Education", reprint from the lecture delivered at the Fall Conference, The Institute for the Study of Art in Education, Department of Art, City College, New York, N.Y., November 1971, pp. 14-21.

19Ibid, p. 22.

15

This content downloaded from 188.72.126.109 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 12:29:37 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions