Heather James and Orla Kenny
Kids’ Own
The Model, The Mall, Sligo, Ireland
tel: +353 (0) 71 914 6364
fax: +353 (0) 71 914 6365
Project site: http://linenireland.org/
This paper we will present a programme developed over three years in partnership with artists and teachers, which included the development of a ‘Response Time’ to encourage artists to revisit their work in light of their experience in the classroom.
In their examination of artists-in-schools programmes, Harland et al (2005) questioned as to what extent the programmes affected teacher practice. In case studies of artists-in-schools programmes specifically using ICT in primary schools in the UK, researchers found there was a ‘danger’ that these innovative projects would not transform the practice of student or teachers, and remain outside of the regular curriculum concerns of the school (Loveless, 2003b, p.72). There needs to be a closer look at how collaborating in the classroom with artists brings out promising changes to teacher practice, and the importance of attending to the integration of artist’s practice into the classroom activity.
In the development of the programme we present here, Trading Places/CR.E.A.T.E., we focused on the teacher’s experience through the use of an online environment to gather reflections, through interviews with individual teachers and group discussions and collaborative writing.
“From the sage on the stage to the guide on the side”, this well-known adage underlines the effect that the introduction of ICTs in the classroom have had on teacher-student relationships. By its nature, ICTs require one to be continuously learning, with the ever-expanding range of new hardware and software. ICTs can have an empowering effect for children, as they leave expertise aside, allowing the teachers, artists and children to explore together, and for “the child to become teacher of the adult” (O’Donoghue, 2002).
While this shift in power is of potential benefit, it does reflect the teacher’s disadvantage in not having the skills or knowledge of what is possible or allowable for creative activities with ICTs. One teacher remarked “I didn’t know you could do that with a scanner”; in reference to making images with found leaves, rocks and twigs on the surface of the scanner bed. The artist had protected the surface of the scanner with a film of plastic from the OHP (overhead projector). The teacher continued, “I thought you could only scan documents. I would not have done that unless I had OK’d it with someone first.”
All teachers on the programme had been given standard ICT training that supplied them with skills to operate the computers and software. While such training does allow for the operation of equipment, it does not ensure advancements in teaching (Kirschner & van den Dool, 2003). There is a pronounced need for training teachers on how to integrate ICT in their teaching practice (Holmes, Savage & Tangney, 2000) allowing for the creative mixing of subject areas. Teachers need more opportunities for creative, integrative training programmes.
In case studies of artists-in-schools programmes carried out in England during February and March 2003, artists were found to have brought to schools "enthusiasm for new approaches" to ICTs, and "motivation for expanding the use of new technologies" (Arts Council England, 2003, p.18). Studies on fostering the creative and innovative use of ICTs in the classroom show that collaboration with artists encourages the development of ideas crucial to creative ICT practice in the classroom (Loveless, 2003a; Pringle, 2003).
Theories of the situated nature of learning (Lave & Wegner, 1991) help explain how artists-in-schools programmes are working. The concept of situated cognition (Lave, 1993) proposes that learning and doing are inseparable in domains of authentic activity. Authentic activity is defined as “the ordinary practices of the culture”(Brown, Collins, & Duguid, 1989, p.5). As a proponent of situated cognition, Jean Lave (1993) critiques traditional cognitive theory for focusing only on the transfer of knowledge and ignoring the creation of new knowledge in practice. Instead, we should consider that learning, or “doing and knowing” are “open-ended processes of improvisation with the social, materials and experiential resources at hand” (Lave, 1993, p.12). For artists (verbal, visual or performing), authentic activity includes not only technical skills and but also thinking approaches.
Artists-in-schools programmes, which specifically involve the use of ICTs, provide an in-context training programme for teachers. When these programmes provide students and teachers with a peek into the artist’s process they learn more than technical methods. The artists share their approaches to working, and the problem solving and experimentation required to create artwork (Pringle, 2003).
However, in order for this to occur, the artists’ practice must be embodied in the programme. In a case-study of an artists-in-schools professional-development programme showed that artists found their work so “distorted by the educational system that they were no longer producing art” (Upitis, 2005). The problem of integrating arts into the curriculum may create a pressure for artists to integrate their work into the school environment. The work is done outside of their studio, and outside of their practice as artists- therefore this limits the experience for all participants.
Case studies of artists in schools programmes show that those having the most positive effects for participants emphasised “collaboration and joint planning between artists and teachers prior to interventions” (Harland et al, 2005). This is an important aspect as in some artist-in-schools programmes the artists don’t even know the teachers’ names (Grauer, 2003).
In order for providing effective and transformative learning experiences for all participants, artists-in-schools programmes must 1) build trusting relationships between teachers and artists, and 2) attend to the practice of the artist within the programme.
In the programme presented here, artists were supported to create work in tandem with their collaborations in the classroom. This addressed the need for integrating the artist’s practice into the classroom collaborations; and for the artists to integrate their experience in the classroom to feed into their studio practice.
The framework for this programme was developed after an experience on another long-term artists-in-schools programme, Multimedia Maps. This programme concluded in 2003, with an exhibition at the Irish Museum of Modern Arts. The findings from that project informed the development of Trading Places/CR.E.A.T.E. Some of the recommendations from Multimedia Maps were that more planning days were required which allowed the teachers and artists to meet together as a group for training; that teachers needed to be brought into planning the programme; and overall that the programme needed to be driven by partnerships between the participants.
Trading Places/CR.E.A.T.E. project was a three-year artists-in-schools programme with a strong focus on professional development. This took place in 10 schools involving eleven artists north and south of the Irish border. The aim of the project was to develop creative partnerships that utilised the power of new technologies and the visual arts as a vehicle for exploring and communicating cultural diversity. At the start of the programme, teachers were given training in methods for developing cross-curricular links, building in continuity across the programme. In a mid-project exchange, teachers shared their methods for linking the programme into the curriculum.
The structure of the programme was comprised of the residencies in the classroom, training and exchange days for teachers and artists. The training and exchange days built strong relationships and bonds between teachers and artists. In a final evaluation of the programme teachers reported that “central to the whole process for [us] teachers was knowing the artist and building up a good friendship”.
At the start of the Trading Places/CR.E.A.T.E. Programme, a two-day event provided the opportunity for the artists and teachers to meet together, share practice and get to know each other. In a format typical of the training and exchange days, participants explored the possible ways of integrating this project into the everyday learning and teaching within a classroom environment through hands-on activities. Participants looked at examples of innovative contemporary artwork and practice; and also explored their existing perceptions about ICT, arts and learning. One of the aims of this event was to instil a sense of purpose, direction and motivation within the participants toward the project.
The subsequent training and exchange days, described below, provided a foundation for artists and teachers to share techniques and ways of working, helping each partnership to find an approach that drew on the strengths of both artist and teacher.
- Planning Day included practical planning at the start of the project; and hands-on activities where artists brought in tools they use in their practice to introduce their practice to the teachers, and their language.
-
Creative Exchange Day happened mid-way
through when artists and teachers
came together and shared technical skills and ideas for the classroom.
- Show-and-Tell Day was an opportunity to show the work in progress and address any ongoing challenges.
- Evaluation Day included group discussions, displays of work, and project evaluation and critique.
The core aim of Year One was establishing a common ground, a shared vision and a good working relationship between the teacher, artist and child. Group training activities during the Year One were designed to make the participants think about how they could incorporate technology as a creative tool to enhance learning in the classroom and into their practice. The focus was on play, improvisation, training, and support. At the end of Year One artists and teachers came together to share the work and evaluate the past year, during this evaluation recommendations were suggested to build on the success and address weaknesses for Year Two.
During the programme artists worked in the school for two days a week over 8 weeks over each school term. One day, Contact Day, was allocated to artist contact with children and teachers and one day was allocated to artist processing and planning in the school. Contact Day was divided into a morning session, afternoon session and a twilight session, which was conducted outside of school hours. This involved the artist and teacher sitting together to evaluate the day’s work and plan ahead. This helped maintain the vital continuity between artists and teachers work.
The second day, Processing Day, was for the artist to review the artwork, conduct technical troubleshooting, process materials (e.g., digitising) and plan for the next session. During that day, each artist had to make an entry in their online journal to document the process and experience. The online journal provided a means for communication amongst schools and a useful method for documenting the development of ideas. Additionally, the project manager from the managing arts organisation visited each school three times; beginning, middle and end to mediate the partnership, as well provide on-site training.
The aim of Year Two was to push the parameters of these partnerships. Year One built a strong partnership between the teachers and artists from which both could come out of their comfort zones. Through group critique during on-site visits during Year One, it became evident that the work was lacking in originality, innovation and vision. It was found that there was little continuity between what the artists were doing in the classroom and what they were doing in their studios. This was limiting the experience for all the participants, because they weren’t engaged in authentic arts practice.
It was at this point that participants were challenged to not only sustain momentum, but also challenge and interrogate existing ways of working and practice. The programme had a unique flexibility that allowed for a change in the planned direction to address this particular problem.
The flexibility meant that mid-way through the project, at the end of Year One, the intense in-classroom collaborations were halted. Artists were asked to go back into their studios to create work in response to their experience in the school. The resulting work was exhibited in a contemporary arts gallery; the show was called “Response.” Children and teachers visited the show and did a hands-on activity with each artist, based on the artworks. It acted a useful segue into Year Two, and provided a stimulus from which to work back in the classroom.
During this response time teachers created their own response with the children sustaining continuity with the artist through video diaries and face-to-face meetings. Following on from the Response exhibition, teachers were provided with an online environment wherein they were able to capture their reflections on their changes in practice.
One of the surprising outcomes from the Response time and exhibition was that each artist completely changed the direction of their work in the classroom. Remarkably, of the eleven artists who did the response seven experienced major changes in their work. This was evident in the use of new materials, the exploration of new themes, and working in new genres.
This meant that when they returned to the classroom, each residency was invigorated and more focused. From the very start of this second year, the level of discussion between the artists, children and teachers was different. An artist commented that the Response allowed him to return to the in-class collaborations “with enthusiasm, purpose and a vision, rather than going through the motions.” The residencies during Year Two were led more by ideas and discussion rather than technique-based.
In their examination of artists and schools programmes, Harland et al (2005) point out that a questioned remained as to what extent the programmes affected teacher practice. In this programme, we made a point of focusing on the teacher’s experience through the use of an online environment to gather reflections and through interviews with individual teachers and group discussions and collaborative writing. Here we present findings directly relating to the learning experience of the teacher.
In the final evaluation day, teachers had a group discussion and collaborated on a document that captured the patterns of their shared experience on the project. Specifically, they focused on what happened in their partnership with the artist; they noted that the collaborations were about sharing control with the artist, and negotiation of the collaborative work.
Teachers found many of their preconceptions challenged. These preconceptions included expectations about children’s attention spans; gender issues about what boys would or would not do; and most importantly, how to approach the teaching of art.
Many of the patterns identified during evaluation were corroborated by evidence gathered during interviews with the teachers recorded during Year Two. Patterns of change in practice are presented here in the preliminary findings, with quotes from interviews, and images from the residencies.
One of the most widely-felt effects of the programme was that teachers expressed gaining a new understanding of art. They understood well that it was not just about painting and drawing- that art was a process and an experience. In collaborative writing session amongst teacher, they said the experience “broadened their minds” about what art could be. In individual interviews, this was evident in how teachers had changed their thinking about how to approach the teaching of art. Several spoke of abandoning the concept of “here’s one I made earlier”; where they would spend much preparation time before class, cutting templates, or preparing materials for assembly by students. They expressed a new approach to teaching art, which brought children into the earlier stages of developing ideas.
It has been suggested that teachers will resort to formulaic lessons when they lack understanding and confidence (Mans 2000). Overall, teacher responses to the programme display a deepened understanding of arts as a process. Teachers displayed an increased understanding of arts, and a confidence developing arts programmes. One teacher responded that he no longer thought you had to be an artist to teach art. After seeing the Response exhibition he found himself with loads of ideas for “things that don’t take hours and hours with loads of preparation and loads of cleaning up.” He was asked to compare arts projects he’d have done before, versus what he would do now, after participating in the programme.
“The art that I’d have done before… I really didn’t have a clue myself. [Now] I have a clearer picture of what you need to do; you can’t just start out and say ‘we’re going to do this’… You have to start with stimulus, something that’s going to fire their imagination, give them ideas, then maybe get them down on paper. Then they have a clear picture of where they’re working from. That’s as opposed to sitting them down and saying ‘do this’ or ‘do that’.”
This reaction was echoed many times by other teachers who found that the process of giving control over to the students was liberating, and in practical terms timesaving and more effective.
The teachers also recognized the value of giving more creative control to students in terms of building self-confidence in the children. As a teacher observed photos taken during a session with the artist, she remarked on the high concentration levels of the students. “This is very good for the group. They can say at the end of the session, ‘Look I created this, it was our own’. It wasn’t somebody who said ‘Now, look at what I’ve done… now you produce the exact same… this is one I’ve done earlier.’”
One teacher articulated her experience in becoming more understanding of art practices.
“I had become very staid in my ways. I felt that art had become something I squeezed in… I felt like I had been doing my art nearly like a wee spot on Blue Peter [a children’s television programme including arts and crafts projects]. I was preparing something earlier, I was bringing out the wee witch for Halloween that had been out the year before… I had lost the direction of art… I wanted everything to be uniform... It had to be a beautiful display. Everything had to be perfectly cut out, no jagged edges. But when Angela came in she showed us there were old skills there that we had forgotten about… There here is this lovely breadth of art that has opened up… It’s not about the end product that counts. It’s the process as opposed to the end product that counts.”
Overwhelmingly, teachers saw the importance of giving creative control over to the students. Rather than displaying an obvious end-of-lesson goal, they realized the students themselves needed to develop their own goals and achieve them.
In many cases, artists would attempt activities that teachers would not have tried themselves. Whether in terms of calculating the time necessary to complete an activity, or in estimating the abilities of students, teachers often found themselves pleasantly surprised by positive outcomes of in-class activities. In two separate incidents, teachers reflected on the poignant experience of realizing how their preconceptions might limit a student’s experience. In those examples, boys took to activities that the teachers assumed the boys would have avoided as being ‘too girly’.
When an artist suggested that a class of ten and eleven year olds engage in a dress-making activity, the teacher later reflected that at the time, she did not think it would work. Out of 24 students, 18 were boys, she assumed they would not take to this activity. She said what they produced was fantastic and that they weren’t being funny about it, “they were showing off in a proud sort of a way… It shows you what enthusiasm can create in a short period of time, and that I should never make assumptions in class.”
When, in another activity with an artist involved sewing, the teacher “expected [the boys] would not take part… I had these preconceptions that boys would not take to these things. I was pleasantly surprised.” In an activity which involved embroidering a drawing, the teacher was surprised that the boys stitching was more accurate than the girls, and that the boys were called on more often to thread needles, and they displayed a more rapt attention to that activity. Reflecting on this, the teacher said:
“Constantly in teaching, we as teachers are bringing what turn out to be our misconceptions… if we didn’t allow our children these experiences, we could be cramping them, and not allowing them the breadth of education. We come with, what turn out to be our own misconceptions, such as ‘children are not going to like this’… that is one thing this project has helped me to do more than anything.”
In conclusion, we have found that artists-in-schools programmes can have transformative impact on teacher practice, especially when built upon strong trusting relationships between partners, and when incorporating the actual working practice of the professional artist. This requires building a framework for training, support and group interactions to reflect on shared experiences. These bonds and foundations provide a springboard from which challenging critique can address emerging problems, which are shared amongst participants.
As was found on other artists-in-schools programmes, we found that- too often- the artists practice was not being adequately integrated into classroom practice. To address this problem, artists were asked to interrogate their own practice in light of their encounters in the classroom. This work was viewed within a contemporary arts context, and the participants could see how their collaborations had resulted in the development of new ideas and directions in the artists work. The level of artistic investigation was raised on the programme, which invigorated the second year of the residencies.
During the third year of this project, participants, including the students, teachers and artists are collaborating on a publication to share their experience. This publication will showcase the work of the partnerships, promoting this way of working and inspiring and guiding others to work in this way. The book will be published in March 2006.
Arts Council of England. (2003). Keys to imagination: ICT in art education. [Online] http://www.artscouncil.org.uk/documents/publications/730.pdf
Brown, J.S., Collins, A., Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Champaign, Ill.: University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Grauer, K. & Garcia, R. (2003). Teaching from the inside-out: an image-based case-study of teacher development in learning through the arts. In A. Clarke & G. Erickson (Eds.), Teacher inquiry: Living the research in everyday practice. London: Routledge Falmer.
Harland, J., Lord, P., Stott, A., Kinder, K., Lamont, E. & Ashworth, M. (2005). The Arts-Education Interface: a mutual learning triangle? Slough: NFER.
Holmes, B., Savage, T., & Tangney, B. (2000). Innovation in Learning in the Information Society: A Comparative International Study. Report to the Lifelong Learning Group of the Information Society Commission. Dublin: The Centre for Research in IT in Education. http://odtl.dcu.ie/mirror/crite/CRITEfinal.html
Lave, J. & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Loveless, A. (2003a). Creating spaces in the primary curriculum: ICT in creative subjects. The Curriculum Journal. 14 (1) 5-21.
Loveless, A. (2003b). The interaction between primary teachers' perceptions of ICT and their pedagogy. Education and information technologies. 8 (4) 313 – 326
Mans, M. (2000). Using Namibian Music/Dance Traditions as a Basis for Reforming Arts Education. International Journal of Education & the Arts, 2000 [Online] http://ijea.asu.edu/v1n3/
O'Donoghue, H. (2002). Exhibition Guide for Multimedia Maps. Irish Museum of Modern Art. Dublin: Ireland.
Pringle, E. (2002). ‘We did stir things up’: The role of artists in sites for learning. London: Arts Council of England.
Upitis, R. (2005). Experiences of Artists and Artist-Teachers Involved in Teacher Professional Development Programs. International Journal of the Education & the Arts. 6:8 [Online] http://ijea.asu.edu/v6n8/
Werner, L., (2002). Artist, Teacher, and School Change Through Arts for Academic Achievement: Artists Reflect on Long-Term Partnering as a Means of Achieving Change, Executive Summary. Minnesota: Center for Applied Research and Educational Improvement, University of Minnesota.