CONTENTS
ABSTRACT ………………………………………………………… 3
AIM OF THIS ESSAY ……………………………………………. 4
PART 1 ………………………………………………………… 5
INTRODUCTION TO REFLECTIVE PRACTICE METHODS … 6
THE NOTION OF PARADIGMS ……………………………. 7
NORTH AMERICAN REFLECTIVE PRACTICE ………….. 8
REFLECTION-IN-ACTION: THE CLASSROOM REALITY .. 10
PART 2: …………………………………………………………….. 12
A REFLECTION ON THE WORKSHOP `WORLD WITHOUT PREJUDICE .. 13
FIVE ARTISTS AND TEACHERS WORKING TOGETHER …………………. 24
HOW IS THIS SIGNIFICANT TO THOSE INVOLVED? ………… 25
PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS FROM THIS REFLECTIONS …. 27
MY EXPERIENCE AS AN ARTIST/TEACHER ………………….. 28
BIBLIOGRAPHY …………………………………………………….. 30
APPENDIX 1: LESSON PLAN & RESOURCES ………………………. 31
APPENDIX 2: CD OF STUDENTS’ WORK ………………………….. 32
APPENDIX 3: HARD COPY OF POWERPOINT OF WORK WITH
STUDENT STATEMENTS ……………………………………. 33
ABSTRACT
In Part 1, this paper will consider theories of critical reflection and their use as educational tools to teachers in the classroom, especially art teachers. This will include reference to Habermas’ paradigms and Akoi’s exploration of these to create a tri-paradigmatic theory applied to art educators and Zeichner’s four `traditions’ of reflection used in North America, in addition to Donald Shon’s helpful theories on the reflective practitioner.
Part 2 will be a reflection on a whole day’s workshop in a large community college, incorporating theories of reflection from the above educational philosophers and applying them to my own experiences. An important part of this reflection is the different approaches taken by myself and the other artist involved and how these two diverse paths met and complemented each other and how the learners themselves were encouraged to think reflectively about their work both to open new doors to learning for them and t o create empathy for the topic `World Without Prejudice’.
Lastly I intend to evaluate the significance of the workshop for the learners and for myself as an artist/teacher. What differences will it make to my own practice in the future? What impact has it had on the students?
TASKS MAKE THE DIFFERENCE: A CRITICAL REFLECTION ON PRACTICE
The Aim of this Essay
In this work I will be reflecting on a full day’s workshop that I led on behalf of the Human Rights Commission at a large (2,400 students) community college in Devon. I will be reflecting on the responses of learners to `outsiders’ in the form of two artists working with them for a day, but, most importantly, on the introduction and acceptance by the learners of tasks they were to perform and how these were used to develop autonomy and democracy alongside creativity in their work. Tasks included the use of digital media and this is an important part of this reflection in relation to skills-base, the gender issue and achievement. I will reflect on a sub-text of the project, which I believe was to create an empathetic response and on how one teacher/artist (myself) managed to work alongside an artist (Ricky Romain) and three teachers in the Art department of the school harmoniously. Do too many artists, all with opinions, ideas and their own ways of working, create problems for learners rather than assistance, or did this situation mean that learners were encouraged to make informed decisions of their own and evolve their own tasks to help develop their ideas?
PART 1
AN INTRODUCTION TO REFLECTIVE PRACTICE THEORY
Introduction to Reflective Practice Methods
There are various styles or methods of reflective thinking, which enhance our ability to improve our practice. Reflective practice in teaching, as in other professions, is a concept that has been with us for some time. Being reflective is a part of human behaviour; most people reflect on their actions or practice, but do not necessarily use the right reflective theory or method. As a tool for educational improvement and thus a subject of research, however, we ascribe the term `reflective thinking’ as opposed to routine thinking, with reference to teaching methodology, to John Dewey as long ago as 1933, Put plainly
reflective teaching involves reflecting on one’s teaching. This
reflection can take place before the event of teaching and manifest
itself as planning, after the event as evaluation and simultaneous
to the teaching as reflection in action involving adjustments to or
accommodation of some of the contingencies that arise.
(Parker 1997: p.8)
The phrase `reflecting-in-action’, used by Parker, was coined by Donald Schon, who discriminated between this and `reflection-on-action’ . In our day-to-day teaching, it is reflection-in-action that we constantly use: our profession is almost founded on the premise that we do this. Reflection-on-action is more formal and a tool for our professional development, as in this essay, looking back on our work and analysing our performance, our use of language perhaps; the learning that went on, certainly. However, it is reflection--in-action that drives our daily connections to our learners, our responses to those situations that cannot be planned; they may be pleasant responses which go beyond our expectations; they may hold promise of exciting possibilities. Or they may be unwelcome and difficult to handle.
Much reflection-in-action hinges on the experience of surprise.
When intuitive, spontaneous performance yields no thing more than
the results expected for it, then we tend not to think about it. But
when intuitive performance leads to surprises, pleasing, promising
or unwanted we may respond by reflecting-in-action……..
In such processes, reflection tends to focus interactively on the
outcomes of action, the action itself and the intuitive knowing implicit
in the action.’
(Schon 1983: p.56)
How learners respond to a planned lesson will depend to a great extent on the task or tasks that are required of them; how these are delivered is equally important, but a task perceived as dull, however it is delivered, invites unwelcome reactions. According to Schon, we `frame’ a situation , put it within known parameters that help us to interpret it and exert our knowledge and expertise on it. When an unexpected situation or problem arises, we have the need to `reframe’ our understanding spontaneously and react accordingly.
The Notion of Paradigms
Schon’s ideas on reflection reference easily to the practicing teacher, reflecting on their work both whilst active in the classroom and whilst looking back on the outcomes of their work after the event. However, the notion of paradigms is central to that philosophical theory of educational enquiry, critical reflection. Paradigms are described as the structured patterns, models, and knowledge of behaviours. Some art teachers have tried to view their teaching situation in terms of paradigms, in an effort to make sense of their personal development.
Akoi refers to paradigms that can be applied to research theory in education; his framework is adapted from Habermas’ three basic forms of knowing. Habermas, after researching modern philosophical writings, discerned connections to epistemology and underlying human interests and he identifies and defines them as forms of knowing. These positions of historical philosophy, defined as paradigms, are as follows:
Paradigm 1: The Empirical-Analytic Orientation.
(Technical Knowing)
Paradigm 2: The Interpretive-Hermeneutic Orientation.
(Situational Knowing)
Paradigm 3: The Critical –Theoretic Orientation.
(Critical Knowing)
(Pearse H. Studies in Art Education Brother, can you spare a
paradigm? The theory beneath the practice 1983)
Since Habermas’ tri-paradigmatic theory came into art education via Akoi’s application of his work to educational issues, much critical reflection in research and practice has been conducted from this perspective. The relevance of this theory to this reflection will be apparent later in this paper.
North American Reflective Practice
Clearly linking to Habermas and Akoi’s interpretations, in North America, reflective practice has been broken down into four distinct concepts or `traditions’ . These have very different outcomes for both teacher and student. The first, Zeichner labelled `The Academic Tradition’, where it is the subject matter and how this can be delivered in an acceptable way to learners in order to promote their understanding of it which is of paramount importance to the reflection.
The second he calls `The Social-Efficiency Tradition’ which emphasises research studies into teaching, not necessarily by those who teach, that has formed the basis for the curriculum and how it should be delivered. Accordingly, reflection should be on how the teacher matches up to the model that this research has come up with. Whilst, as teachers, we may find ourselves in the position of having to do this, on its own it would ignore many pressing issues that we encounter daily; not least the nature of our subject, especially the creative subjects, the environment and needs of our social mix of learners.
The third `tradition’ Zeichner refers to as `The Developmentalist Tradition’. In this the teacher reflects on the way their learners respond, think, and understand. It is learner-centred. From understanding these things, the teacher can develop ways of teaching which are more meaningful to their learners individually and collectively. This tradition, or model, is closest to one that I believe works well.
Lastly, he identifies the `Social-reconstructionist Tradition’, in which the teacher reflects inwardly on their own practice as well as on the social conditions of the society in which it is practiced. It walks along the thin line of political correctness and social manipulation. In our own education system, there are often issues which we must consider where society inevitably must impinge on our planning and our reflections: these could be issues such as sexual orientation, race etc.
Reflection-in-Action: the classroom reality
Whilst these distinctions are interesting, it is more usual, and, on a day-to-day basis, more useful, in reflective practice to reflect in a more random, personal way. Threads of all four `traditions’ run throughout all teacher reflections, but remain unlabelled, working in a continuum: which brings us back to Schon’s reflection–in-action. Dissecting the action of reflection and putting it under a microscope has inherent dangers, where the actual benefits may be lost. Schon warns us of these
As teachers attempted to become reflective practitioners, they would
feel constrained by and would push against the rule-governed system
of the school, and in doing so they would be pushing against the
theory of knowledge which underlies the school. Not only would
they struggle against the rigid order of lesson plans, schedules,
isolated classrooms, and objective measures of performance; they
would also question and criticize the fundamental idea of the school
as a place for the progressive transmission of measured doses of
privileged knowledge.
(Schon 1983: p. 334)
Our methods of teaching, the content of our lessons and the ways in which we are judged or assessed are increasingly constrictive. Even the looser reflection-in-action we have discussed, implies an impulsive and spontaneous digression or deflection from our initial rigid planning which the rigid format of lesson observation internally and externally to the school discourages emphatically. It implies a more responsive and creative approach to the classroom as it puts more autonomy in the hands of the individual teacher. As much of what we, as teachers, do in the classroom now follows a prescription, should we reflect that reflective practice will stand in opposition to government strategy in the formulation of educational practice?
PART 2
A REFLECTION ON THE WORKSHOP `WORLD WITHOUT PREJUDICE’
Reflection on the Workshop `World Without Prejudice’
I have previously studied the educational theories and practices of John Ruskin in the nineteenth century. He was a radical thinker in his time and stressed the importance of skills in art education, not just for the sake of observation, but also for the sake of understanding the world around us. This is a principle with which, essentially, I still concur. Armed with technical skills, the artist, artist/teacher and artist/student is then able to be expressive and creative without being frustrated by the inability to put things into concrete visual terms. As we shall see, the methodology of this workshop appears to run contrary to these beliefs – at least on the surface of things. This is why this particular workshop has been chosen for my reflection.
I had the situation framed within my previous classroom experiences, in which students would arrive to a one-hour lesson; that lesson would be delivered in four parts: the starter, the introduction, the main activity and the plenary. Although the workshop was a whole, five-hour day, the overall framework of my plan for it followed the prescribed format. In accordance with Zeichner’s `Social Efficiency Tradition’ , this format has been imposed by educational researchers, although willingly embraced by teacher trainers and educators. It is a format that makes inspection a more straightforward exercise as it imposes a rigid set of criteria on teaching and learning. As such, I felt that my lesson plan for the workshop met the expected criteria and would thus be water-tight.
The workshop was sponsored by the Human Rights Commission and was part of a Young Brit at art Award to bring human rights issues into focus in schools through art. The topic was `World Without Prejudice’ and was to be delivered to Year 10 GCSE students. I recruited the artist Ricky Romain, whose work also focuses on human rights, especially the plight of genuine asylum seekers, to work with me; we had forty-two learners between us with the help of three members of the art staff of the college. We were allocated two good-sized art rooms, with access, however, to only three computers. The day was to run from 8.30 a.m. to 3.30 p.m., with the potential to work on longer if we needed to and the learners wanted to.
The first hoop to jump through was recruiting the right `other’ artist to work with. Although a printmaker had been suggested to me, I knew Ricky from a previous exhibition I had done with him, and from various meetings and activities. His work resonates with and complements my own which I felt would be an important aspect for the planning and learning of the day. He works from an emotive, mark-making stance, and I wanted learners to engage with digital technology in conjunction with this; the question hanging in the air was, `Is this possible?’ I also felt that the technology aspect might engage boys with the topic successfully. So I approached Ricky and discussed ideas with him. He runs a lot of workshops in schools, so I knew he would be comfortable working with Year 10 students.
Referring to Zeichner’s `Academic Tradition’ of reflection, my first concern in the planning stage was to find an acceptable way of delivering the topic `World Without Prejudice’; how would the learners best understand the situations and emotional impact of such a topic? This `tradition’ links to Habermas’ `Empirical-Analytic’ paradigm which values technical understanding, the actual, practical work involved; `Efficiency, certainty and predictability are valued’ . As I value the learning of skills to promote the furtherance of ideas and the ability to realise them visually, this paradigm/tradition resonated well with my proposed way of working, using digital media to extend the visual imagery created.
I chose to work with Ricky Romain as a practising artist as, by doing so, the aspect of critical and contextual studies, which I believe is so important to the practical study of art, would be incorporated. Quoting from my previous work,
We contextualise art and artists and how we understand the work of
individuals and movements in art is now enshrined in government
art educational strategy. It is now generally agreed that practical art
and critical studies in art are mutually dependent, that the one
improves the appreciation and study of the other.
Ricky was pleased to be asked to work with me to deliver this workshop topic, but, as time went on, I realised he was not one for planning and, apart from a few good suggestions, was content to turn up on the day and let things develop organically, rather than plan for them. This is not how I have always operated. My own approach was to develop a detailed Lesson Plan for the day (see Appendix 1). Thus I felt, with our two opposing approaches, there had to be compromise: this was evident at the workshop itself and has led to some change in my own further practice in art education. It has also led to a development in the practice of workshop teaching for Ricky. However, at the outset, I had major concerns over how the workshop would run, given our different approaches to delivering learning to learners. One thing I was sure of was that Ricky would deliver critical and contextual studies to the students.
Ricky Romain started the presentation to the students, explaining his work and the strong connection he has to human rights issues as well as his work with Amnesty International. During our discussions prior to the workshop, I had urged Ricky to create some examples of materials-based experiments to show the students in addition to samples of his own work, as I was doing. However, he did not do this, but talked at some length about his work. The learners were interested at first, but became fidgety and bored after the first ten minutes. Excerpts from their feed back forms under the least useful or enjoyable category read:
- `There was a lot of discussion about each piece of work rather than what we were doing in the workshop (LC)
- `How there were too many examples of work from the artist who came – most were nearly identical and it went on for too long to be interesting.’ (HJ)
Upon reflection, I should have tactfully created a digression or discussion with the students about his work after a short time, which would have involved them more and would have enabled me to cut short the over-long introduction from Ricky. The danger was that we could have lost some students at that point, had the activities that grew from the introductions been less engaging.
As it was, I felt that I had to curtail my own introduction, so I started it with an introduction into the work we were about to engage in and an explanation about my background, and how that has influenced me. My family background consists of the fact that my father escaped from Auschwitz then joined the resistance and British army, and his family all served out most of the war trying to survive in a concentration camp. I had decided that I would immerse the learners in a complete experience, so, as part of this, I later showed a clip of film work I had put together showing images of Auschwitz. The students found this very inspirational: evaluating their work under the questions about what was most useful or enjoyable, these were a selection of comments:
- `Looking at the video of the Holocaust victims was interesting and inspired our work’ (EG)
- `The video about the Holocaust – really well done and moving’ (HJ)
- `The slide show about Auschwitz (German concentration camp in WWII) (JW)
Generally, the boys had little to say on their evaluation forms; the girls were
more articulate about their thoughts; however, the boys were quite inclined to
mention the images of the Holocaust and stories of its horrors on their forms.
We also used one of my own videos, music throughout the whole day from cultural backgrounds and a presentation to encourage questioning and answers and to help inspire their ideas; a total experience that we hoped would evoke a good response. Most importantly, we immersed the learners and the rooms with projected materials; this was not a brainwashing scenario, but an immersion technique to enable learners slowly to absorb ideas.
After some demonstrations with Photoshop, various media were introduced to create an awareness of the issues connected to human rights and an empathetic connection to others. We talked a lot about mark-making (Fig.1) and how the qualities of the different media we were introducing gave added expression to the thought.
Fig. 1 Mark-making
We demonstrated the characteristics of Indian ink, oil bars and pastels, using both paper and card, and encouraged the students not to work around specific ideas at first, but to make marks and see where these would lead them; this was an entirely new way of working for the learners. Perhaps, in my opinion, the most valid of Zeichner’s four traditions of reflection, the `Developmentalist Tradition’ influenced my `reflection–in-action’ here. All the students became fully engaged in their work and enjoyed working with the different forms of media and the interaction with the Artists themselves. Some comments from the students on their reflective evaluation forms were:
- `I like exploring new ways of using medias (sic) and being able to put my ideas on a page.’ (JP)
- `Learning how to use different materials and being messy and showing how I feel in my art.’ (GB)
- `Being inspired by the artists’ work and getting to use the materials they used.’ (ADB)
Talking to the learners as they worked (Fig. 2) made me respond actively and positively to the way they were thinking and understanding the topic and their own ways of working with it.
Fig. 2 Discussion between artist/teacher and learner about using Photoshop to enhance images and reproduce them for mixed media piece.
Accordingly, as the day went on I lifted the size restrictions that the Human Rights Commission had stipulated, allowing students to express their thoughts on as grand a scale as they wanted to. Many found this really liberating.
The inclusion of digital media enabled learners to `play’ with their images, and expand their visual expression.
Fig. 3: Digital work by R M
Digital methods were introduced as a way of enhancing images and exploring techniques (Fig. 3) rather than a way of producing a final outcome in itself. Boys were especially interested in this means to their ends. The results were quicker, more spontaneous, and did not require the patience or time that purely physical means of expression did. This did not make their outcomes of any less value or interest; just different (Fig. 4).
Fig. 4: Digital manipulation by LB
I worked one-to-one with all the students and encouraged them to be reflective on their work and the feelings they were trying to express through it. Enid Zimmerman wrote in 1997 of a comparative study she carried out with two art teachers, both of whom were considered successful as a result of student interviews and student outcomes. However,
The second painting teacher …. provided opportunities for
developing only art-making skills. The first painting teacher
not only provided skill development opportunities, but also
encouraged students to think reflectively about the contexts
in which they created art, to become engaged with art issues
and to examine their reasons for creating art.
(Clark and Zimmerman in The Journal of Art Education Vol. 31. 4: p.59)
She concluded that the first teacher in the study was the better. Part of Zimmerman’s conclusions to her study was also that `teachers … should reflect critically about their own teaching strategies’ . Personally, I reflected not only on my own strategies, but also on each learner’s work as they talked me through it in order to support their individualism. It was a process of constantly building on minute-to-minute knowledge of each learner as we rushed them through a path of ideas and techniques. Habermas’ third paradigm, the `Critical-Theoretic Orientation’ , is rooted in the activity of reflection.
wherein people analyze and transform themselves and their social
world. Its fundamental interest is emancipation and improvement of
the human condition. Knowing is critical knowing which aims to render
transparent tacit and hidden assumptions by initiating a process of
transformation designed to liberate and …. empower people.
(Pearse, Beyond Paradigms (1992) p. 244)
.
Using the reflective approach method we all learned from the day’s artwork. The word `empower’ is pertinent to the outcomes of the day; the learners felt empowered by the fact that they were free to express their own ideas, in ways that did not bind them to a rigid process. The students enjoyed the fact that I had removed any restrictions, and in some way this was right, as they made connections to this freedom and human rights. This simple act really did liberate their ideas and potentials. Some comments from the `Student Evaluation Forms’ illuminate this under the section: `What did you like best about the workshop?’:
- `The fact that we were given no boundaries on the work and were free to do what we wanted.’ (MT)
- ‘We had a lot of freedom’ (ER)
’ `Painting and drawing on big card’ (SS)
They needed little encouragement to express their feelings in their artwork. In the `Social Reconstructionist Tradition’ identified by Zeichner, I reflected that although this community college serves a varied social area, the learners had probably never had occasion to consider human rights issues before; that the issues Ricky Romain had presented them with on the suffering of genuine asylum seekers, had probably never crossed their minds before either. The college is in a relatively unchallenged area of the country; students do however, confront issues in their own lives like bullying. I was impressed therefore that the learners had empathised so deeply with global human rights issues of such magnitude as much of their work demonstrated. The girls in the group tended to react more sensitively to the plights of others; they were more empathetic; the boys were more interested in the aspects of pain and death – a more mawkish response, although empathetic in a distinctly different way.
Clark and Zimmerman wrote of the need to conduct more research into educating talented artists which looks more closely at their social-cultural environments, their beliefs and values, interactions and so on . I am not sure that it is research that is necessary, or just that, as teachers, we need to be more aware of inclusion and creating greater empathy in and between our learners. I believe that the gender issue should become part of that social-cultural research. The empathetic response differential in genders is an interesting arena for development and understanding human rights and human frailties. Habermas’ second Paradigm, the `Interpretive-Hermeneutic Orientation’ , relates to locating individuals in their social world.
An art educator operating from this orientation is interested in the
subjective and intersubjective meanings an artwork (an artistic
activity) have for the child. ….. essentially the educational process
is seen as a dialogue with others and with oneself, in the world
of things, people and ideas.
(Pearse H, Beyond Paradigms (1992) p. 245)
However, we were asking learners to look beyond their own social experience if they could and into another world. Could their responses ever be anything but subjective? We certainly were expecting a visual dialogue with the reflective process I encouraged, and a verbal dialogue in the peer teaching and learning that developed between the students as they worked.
Five artists and teachers working together
Instructions to the teachers present to build on the development of skills and reflective ideas made the pace of learning very fast. Reflective, personalized learning had proved to be more effective than repetitive task class situations, or clearly defined expected outcomes.
The school’s staff involved in the workshop also found the approach to expression and development of empathetic feelings very liberating from their normal/formal ways of working – as did I. The fast pace of learning and expression encouraged all staff to work creatively with the learners and expand their own teaching experience. Putting five artist/teachers in one situation with a group of students will probably produce five different approaches and sets of advice, however, be this as it may, the students took on board the advice offered then made their own choices; another example of the organic nature of the day’s teaching and learning. It promoted decision-making in the young artists and the ability to work with their own feelings and emotions. Although my plan for the day still followed the rough outline of the four-part lesson, this grew and changed organically as the needs of the learners changed and developed with the development of their work. In this respect, working with Ricky added to my own teaching repertoire, the ideas of the teaching staff and the attitude to learning of the students involved themselves. The enthusiasm created by the day was fizzing: quotes from the evaluation section on what was best about the workshop include:
- `Using new ideas and doing things I wouldn’t normally do.’ (RJ)
- `Being able to choose my topic to do with prejudice and having the freedom to express my ideas’ (MP)
- `The fact that we got to try out new styles of art and using different medias to normal.’ (FB)
- The chance to make a mark and change society whilst having fun.’ (MB)
The expression and feeling in all their pieces of art is tangible and infectious, and
all the students, teaching staff and Ricky and myself, had clearly enjoyed the day,
although everyone involved was quite exhausted by the end. The day had become a holistic and harmonious experience through which all parties had learnt. The response from the Human Rights Commission was extremely positive: they said that I had `raised the bar’ in terms of the expressive and technical quality of the students work. Some of the students’ work will now appear in an exhibition at the Saatchi Gallery in the summer. Examples of all the students’ work can be found in Appendix 2.
How is this significant to Those Involved?
The immersion technique was instrumental in the success of the day. Clips of students’ work were constantly projected around the rooms; appropriate music was being played, personal experiences were recounted, my videos of Holocaust-related topics were shown – students were put in the position of empathisers, a quality I believe we need to encourage in our society to as great a degree as possible. To have merely shown examples of our work as the artists and talked the learners through the concepts behind them, would not have worked; it would have been more like voyeurism than empathy. As previously recorded, many of the students felt the introduction of the artists’ work was too long and tedious as it was. To merely have relied on this, with a demonstration of techniques coupled with verbal instructions, would not have gained the full involvement and participation of the learners: more importantly for me, it would not have had the emotive qualities that drew out their empathy with victims of human rights abuses. One student wrote in her evaluation of the day, that the part she liked least was seeing my video on Auschwitz as it was so unpleasant. It was not intended to be pleasant, it succeeded in its intention to shock viewers out of their complacency into empathy.
Also of significance for the learners was the green light to express their ideas and feelings. They found this approach very liberating creatively. This was equally true of myself. I learnt that it is not always best practice to plan too tightly. At the other end of the scale, Ricky’s approach was far too loose, and some students were left not knowing what he was expecting from them. I had to extend my workload in many instances by having to spend time with some of the students in his `group’. Modifying the plan to accommodate the unexpected - reflection-in-action - is crucial to good teaching and enjoyable, progressive learning. Personal development for the learners cannot evolve without this flexibility. The tasks make the difference indeed, but the learners must participate, albeit unknowingly, in the development and implementation of those tasks. Not only must the teacher reflect in action, but the students must do this too, to modify their responses and push their concepts out and on.
This is not to say that the day was not planned. The plan stayed in place but underwent modifications in response to the creative developments of the learners as the day progressed. My own expectations of the learning were surpassed because I was able to absorb enough of Ricky’s organic way of doing things to be flexible and responsive to each moment and each learner as their needs arose. The students learnt both through demonstration and instruction, and through empirical means, about the expressive potentials of media that were new to them. Starting the day by encouraging them purely to make marks which could then suggest feelings and forms, instantly gave them new freedoms. The danger could have been that they would have had no idea what to do, what we expected of them; in reality, this open approach gave them unexpected horizons – without parameters – and they loved it.
Practical Applications From This Reflection
The luxury of having a whole day with one cohort of learners is unusual. Putting the experiences of it into the context of the normal one-hour lesson, twice a week may be difficult. The prescribed four-part lesson, leaving room for less practical work than most teachers would like, does not lend itself easily to the strategies used in the workshop. However, smaller bites-of-the-cake could be assimilated into the lesson structure we must use. Instead of spending hours with many materials, learners could be restricted to one or two per session over a period of two or three lessons. Demonstrations of the use of these after a short starter, where students are to make an experimental expression of an emotion, perhaps, would lead to a longer period of mark-making and peer assessment before the end.
After a planned period, digital manipulation could be used on images produced, ensuring all learners were given the opportunity to experience what new avenues can be opened by this means. It is true that a greater degree of structure would be unavoidable, but it is equally true that the two opposing approaches can be accommodated comfortably and, above all, as a successful learning strategy, together. In doing so, all three of Habermas’ paradigms are incorporated, as are Zeichner’s traditions. These are academic structures that, as teachers, we are not conscious of in our day-to-day work, but, upon reflection, they form a useful framework for our `reflection-on-action.’
My Experience As An Artist-Teacher
My usual concerns with close observational work and the kind of processes demanded by the examination boards also experienced a renaissance through this workshop; I am now able to find a balance in my teaching between prescription and potential chaos – a place where learning embraces skills, empirical investigation and expression without fixed expectations. I finished the workshop feeling that we, as teachers and artists, are also very much learners ourselves – a triple role.
I started the project with definite plans: these had to be adapted to make for some compromise between we two artists: but the most interesting aspect was how, through reflection-in-action, as the learners themselves began to contribute more and more to the expectations and to the development of their ideas and skills, the planning for the day and its direction changed subtly and adapted to the new ideas presented by those we were there to teach. They had much to offer us and in return our approach of immersion and freedom to express ideas through materials and digital media was highly motivational.
I learned how to work with the strengths of others, teachers, artists and students, on a more personal level where responses and my teaching methods have become less didactic and more experiential. I am passing on my experiences in a more empathetic way rather than merely passing on themes and techniques. The shift in my own teaching is mainly in an increased awareness of the need for flexibility as a natural response to `reflection-in-action’ and an increased awareness of the creative opportunities to be explored by allowing learning to grow organically from a given point introduced by myself as teacher and nurtured by myself as artist.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Burnard P., Hennessy S. (Eds) Reflective Practices in Art Education: Dordrecht: Springer (2006)
Carlgreen I., Handal G., Vage S. (Eds) Teachers’ Minds and Actions: Research on Teachers’ Thinking and Practice London: Falmer Press (1994)
Clark G., and Zimmerman E. The Influence of Theoretical Frameworks on Clark and Zimmerman’s Research About Art Talent Development The Journal of Aesthetic Education, Vol 31, No 4 pp 49 – 63 (1993)
Habermas, J. Knowing and Human Interests. Boston: Beacon Press (1971)
Moon J. A Handbook of Reflective and Experiential Learning: Theory and Practice London: Routledge Falmer (2004)
Parker S. Reflective Teaching in the Postmodern World Buckingham: OUP (1997)
Parker T. Continuing the Journey – the Artist-Teacher MA as a Catalyst for Critical Reflection The International Journal of Art and Design Education, Vol 28, No 3, pp379-286 (2009)
Pearse H. Brother, can you spare a paradigm? The theory beneath the practice Studies in Art Education (1983)
Pearse H. Beyond Paradigms: Art Education Theory and Practice in a Postparadigmatic World Studies in Art Education: a Journal of Issues and Research Vol 33, No 4, pp244 – 265 (1992)
Schon D. A. The Reflective Practitioner Aldershot: Avebury (1983)
www.jstor.org/stable/1320669
