Week #7 Common Core

My experiences in this class and my growing familiarity with Mary's research constitute most of my experience with the new Common Core objectives.

From what I can tell thus far, the Common Core seem to be a distinct reaction to No Child Left Behind with it's emphasis on standardized testing, rote memorization, reductive thinking, and the kind of learning experience it encourages.  The Common Core Standards emphasize evidential reasoning, seeking multiple solutions, collaboration, plasticity of thought in light of new information,  understanding of purpose, and cultural awareness.  I am inclined to view this as an improvement and a move in the right direction toward preparing our students for a future in a hyper-connected, media saturated, multicultural world, in which innovations and creative solutions will be warranted to solve global problems and meet the demands of a society that looks very different than it did a generation ago.

Art certainly takes its place at the table when goals like these are guiding education, so long as we approach it correctly.  Art education will have to transform to meet these kinds of objectives just as much as math and science will.  But the good news is, it should be easy and liberating for us.  We can shift our focus away from flat formal skills-based lessons and begin building our curriculum around understanding visual culture, problem solving through art, and expressing ideas about the shared human experience through universal visual language. 

As we discussed during the VTS seminar a couple of weeks ago, VTS supports virtually all of the common core objectives for language arts in a number of ways.  Some are crystal clear (i.e. Students comprehend as well as critique, they demonstrate independence, they value evidence, and the come to understand other perspectives and cultures).  Others are a bit less obvious , but the connections are still there.  I think VTS is ideally suited to introduce students to viewing art in a meaningful way.  The days of the droning, one sided, history lecture are over.  Its about time.

Bog Topic for Week #5

I realize I have my posts a little out of order, but because we got off to a late start with the BWC, I felt I needed a little more time to observe and get to know the students before responding to week 5's assignment.  I apologize for any confusion.

There is one student in particular who participates actively in VTS discussions, but displays hesitancy, frustration, and ultimately disengagement when it comes to the writing and art making activities that follow.  I believe this student may be succumbing to a pattern of being behind his classmates (perhaps even more so in the regular classroom setting) and therefor he is somewhat disadvantaged by doubts before he even begins.  VTS, however, levels the playing field and his contributions are seen as just as valuable as any other.  I see him confidently raising his hand and contributing observations in every discussion and I'm hoping to see that confidence, which is being built through VTS, carry over into the other activities.

I plan to give this student more one on one attention during the art making activities so that he doesn't fall behind the other students and get frustrated.  I'm hoping that if he has a positive experience in the BWC from start to finish, he will be able to overcome some of his hesitancy, which I think is a bigger obstacle for him than any actual lack of ability.

Blog Topic #6 Reviewing the Tape

The participation of the boys was varied this time.  Some hands shot up immediately and eagerly participated the whole time, while there were a few that we did not hear from at all.  All boys sat quietly, though, and listened to one another.

Right away the boys noticed that the picture was about a game about to be cancelled by rain.  I thought it was interesting that it wasn't until about half way through the discussion that someone actually identified the three central figures as umpires.  There was a fair amount of discussion about what was going on with the figures just behind the umpires and others noticed more players in the distance, although, rather than describing them as far away, they described them as small.

There wasn't much interaction among the boys in terms of linking, agreeing, or disagreeing this time around.  Most boys just offered their own observations independently of others.  Toward the end, one student identified the protective equipment that had previously been identified as perhaps a potato chip or a pork chop.  Reactions from the crowd seemed to indicate corroboration with this observation.

One thing I learned from facilitating this lesson, is to take all comments seriously with neutrality.  When the boys began identifying what to me was clearly baseball equipment as potato chips and porkchops, I was tempted to assume that they were just goofing around.  But upon watching the video, I think there was more sincerity in their uncertainty about those objects than I realized.  And they did succeed at providing visual evidence for their assertions, so fair enough, I guess.

I think I stuck to the question format fairly successfully.  I don't usually have too much trouble with that aspect of the method.  Watching myself on video, though, I can see the subtleties in my responses and my paraphrasing and how much of an impact that can have on the discussion.

I was surprised that I felt more nervous in front of the students than I have practicing with my peers.  I feel more pressure to really get it right for the boys than I do when with my fellow practitioners in training.  I was also surprised that some of the comments that seemed silly and off the wall were really more sincere than I realized.  I'm learning to follow their lead, and not the other way around.

I want to continue to work on my neutrality and not give the impression that some answers are more right than others.  I think I can achieve this by keeping an open mind.

BLOG TOPIC #4: Assessing, Reflecting, Planning

This morning I led a VTS discussion of Norman Rockwell's "Three Umpires", my first VTS experience with stage 1 viewers in a classroom.  Participation was not quite as good as I expected it to be, considering that these boys are fairly familiar with doing VTS.  I think about 1/3 of the boys made no comments during the discussion.  Those who did participate offered a mix of assertions, some evidenced and some not, as well as a few interpretations.  Most seemed to understand right away that the picture is about a baseball game being rained out.  A number of comments attempted to interpret what was going on between the two partially hidden figures behind the umpires; perhaps a bribe, some kind of deal, or betting.

Students behaved and interacted well during the discussion, as I expected.  Most of these boys have done VTS before and are familiar with the rules.  They raised their hands when they wanted to contribute, and most waited patiently to be called on.  I did notice that when one boy made a comment that I believe he knew to be silly, (I see a potato chip) other boys sort of wanted to follow suit, but the discussion got easily back on track.  Several boys drew on prior knowledge about what kinds of clothes and equipment baseball players and umpires wear.  One boy recognized the text  that appears to be painted on a wall to be advertising.  I thought it was interesting that even though he couldn't give a lot of further justification for why he identified it as advertising, he new that he was accustomed to seeing ads on the walls of stadiums. I could see that the students were really trying to figure out what was going on in this scene, not just with the three main figures in the foreground, but those in the midground and background as well, which tells me that they are looking closely.

I definitely found leading the discussion with young, stage one viewers to be a little more challenging than leading my peers.  At times their ideas were a little hard to follow, as they wanted to list several things at once or were making observations and assertions that were not completely evident or clear to me.  This also made neutrality more difficult.  When a student made an off the wall observation, I had to be aware of my reaction, so as not to give the impression that they had gotten it wrong.  Conversely, when I noticed a student putting things together, I had to be careful to not be more affirming.  For example, I think I responded with "interesting" to the potato chip comment, "good" to most of the comments, and "yes, good" to some that I felt were really getting back on the right track.

I did not have the opportunity to look closely at the image before today's VTS which I didn't think would make too much of a difference, especially since this was a classic image that I had seen before, but now I can see how helpful it is to study the image beforehand.  I was able to conduct the VTS well enough, but my gesturing to the right parts of the image was a little hesitant and uncomfortable.  Hopefully this will be alleviated next time when I have a chance to look at the image first. 

I also think I should have actually rehearsed my introduction a little more.  Fortunately these boys knew the routine, but I could have started things out a little more smoothly.

So, bottom line...preparation is key.

                                               

                                              “A Meeting, 1884” by Maria Bashkirtseff

 

I like this choice of image for the Boy Writer's Club pre-assessment activity.  It lives up to the challenge posed by the diversity of ages and stages represented in the group and provides us with one unified "control" image from which to compare pre and post assessment responses. 

According to Abigail Housen's article Art Viewing and Aesthetic Development: Designing for the Viewer, "Stage II viewers’ central questions concern the way the image looks and how it was made; questions about technique and skill mix with ones about artistic choice and values".  In light of this assertion, I think it's notable that this image is more realistically rendered and objective, therefore, I predict these students (many of them stage II) will be less fixated on the ‘quality’ or appearance of the work, as they might be with a more abstracted piece, and more curious about what is going on, what are the boys talking about, what are they planning to do, what is in the tallest boy’s hand, etc.  Furthermore, I think the imagery is relatable given that the BWC is a group of multi-aged boys, as are the figures represented.  There is clearly a story going on here, leaving the viewer with much to speculate about events leading up to this moment and what may be about to happen.  Their imaginations could really run wild with this, generating lots of stories about the nature of this rendezvous.  I wonder if any of the boys will take notice of the figure on the far right of the image in the background, who appears to be a girl.  Perhaps there is some kind of exclusivity to this meeting, if not a little old-fashioned playground gender warfare.  Her back is turned to the viewer and given her position in the frame, it is possible that the girls are staging a meeting of their own.

Some of the students who may be brushing up against a stage III level of inquiry and interpretation may take note of the time period, based on the kinds of clothes the figures are wearing and want to know more about the historical context of this artist and this piece.

Overall, I think there will be no shortage of imaginative speculation.  I look forward to the experience!

VTS Blog Post 2

Going in to the afternoon session of Saturday's activities, I admit, I was nervous about doing VTS for the first time.  I was so impressed by how confidently and eloquently everyone led their discussion, even though most of us were newbies.  Many of us described the discussion becoming easier and more natural as the activity went on and I certainly felt the same way.  Hopefully, this is an indication of a continued upward trajectory for my confidence with this method.

Working with such a bright and astute group (wink, wink) who were relatively familiar with the method certainly made this process work much more smoothly than I would expect it to go with beginning viewers.
The thing that impressed me most, however, was the apparent value of simply discussing artwork in a group.  Most museum goers shuffle through the galleries and corridors speaking only in hushed whispers and seem apprehensive to disclose their reactions even to members of their own party, let alone strangers.  The structure of this method, in particular, is clearly well thought out and lends itself to optimal results, but just the process of looking carefully and sharing our observations aloud takes the experience in an upward spiral of deeper noticing.

What I really love about the VTS method so far is how naturally it can bring art to life for someone who might normally feel alienated by it.  Because VTS allows the viewer to analyze the work as part of a group, building upon and spinning off of what others have noticed, the viewer is not left alone with the piece, stabbing in the dark about what it might mean and second guessing themselves over whether or not they're "getting it right" as though there were a definitive right or wrong answer to be extracted.

To further this point, I also wanted to draw attention to the article we read by Phillip Yenawine, Theory into Practice: the visual thinking strategies (1999).  He describes the inadequacy of teaching art from a distance, focusing on the dusty tombs of art history, as if that could possibly engage a passion for art in the heart of the raw, untrained viewer, especially children.  He states, "the presentation of historical fact - a mainstay of museum teaching - so often proved ineffectual in engaging people before early adolescence.  At that early age, viewers make sense of what they encounter concretely as they maneuver through the world.  Abstract concepts, such as the concept of time, are of little interest or meaning...Schooling makes the same mistake in asking children to learn history from a factual basis - names, dates, and events.  Young people can indeed make a kind of sense of the objects left to us by history, but it is from examining them concretely for whatever visual information they can connect to concrete experience form their own lives. (p. 4)  This REALLY resonated with me.  I believe in fostering a "naturalized affection" for the arts in children by exposing them to art in the present (even if the art is from the past).  Children need to make, touch, smell, and hear art, as well as be enabled to look at work in a way that lets them tell the story.  When they feel comfortable with and excited about art a natural curiosity about the history, the facts, and the theories emerges; they will be hungry for it.

I got so much more out of the pieces we VTSed in the museum together than I EVER would have alone.  I'm looking forward to jumping in and trying it out with the kiddies and seeing what curve balls that experience throws at me.  I'm sure I'll have to take a great deal more care in setting up and explaining the activity; laying the ground rules and getting everyone focused.  I plan to work on scripting that out roughly before my first session with the boy writers.  Suggestions are welcome!

Thanks for such a great Saturday everyone!

VTS Blog Post 1

Hi everyone!  My name is Karen Shortt-Stout.  I am embarking on my second semester in the Art Education Graduate Studies program, and as such I am not a full-fledged classroom teacher yet.  Fortunately, I have been offered the opportunity to do VTS work this semester with the Boy Writers Club at Ridgeway Elementary School here in Columbia, Mo.  Unfortunately, I don’t have all the details just yet on the specific group of students with whom I will be working, so this first blog post will have to be based largely on my own speculation.

What I can say about the Boy Writer’s Club in general is that it is the brain child of Ridgeway Principal Ben Tilley who hopes to find ways to make writing fun and exciting for boys, who statistically are not as strong in writing as girls.  Part of the rationale for working with students in a writing centered program is that their written responses to the VTS experience, whether reflective or creative, provide a unique tool for assessing the ways in which VTS can address the Common Core Standards for Language arts and Literacy (https://bblearn.missouri.edu/bbcswebdav/pid-846480-dt-content-rid-17937669_1/courses/ltc_8900_mf2/COMMON%20CORE%20State%20Standards%20Initiative.PDF), a goal which is of particular interest to the research being conducted in this class.

Many of the boys in the club have done VTS with students in the past, so depending on the particular group I wind up working with, I imagine at least some of them will be familiar with discussing art and even with the VTS method itself.  Working with a large group of young boys, I think it is safe to anticipate some issues with corralling and holding their attention, however, I hope to be able to redirect all of that energy into some positive outcomes.  Young boys possess such  a fantastic, not to mention entertaining, wealth of creativity and energy that is in every way equal to, although different from that of girls.  I anticipate no shortage of creative ideas, but I think the biggest challenge may be in guiding and honing those ideas into materialization.

I am so excited about working with this program and learning from all of you!