CIRCA 89 Art Education Supplement
ART IN EDUCATION, EDUCATION IN ART: A VISON OF ART EDUCATION IN THE TWENTY-FIRST CENTURY
The experience of art education in the century just concluding should not define our image of art education in the twenty-first century. What is needed is a balance between the realities of art education as we have known it, and the realistic possibilities of art education as it might be.
If education in general remains defined by the twentieth century experience, then our vision of art education can be described simply as more of the same—marginalisation, inferiority and eccentricity. A more hopeful vision is possible, however, when art education is viewed through the prism of developments in general education policy and practice.
This article, therefore, attempts to locate the discussion of art education within the context of wider education policy. It is based on the premise that art in education is more important than education in art. There are inherent dangers in this approach. Legitimate concerns have frequently been expressed by arts educators in this country and abroad in respect of any extrinsic rationale for arts education, that is, justifying visual art education on any terms other than its own intrinsic value.
Extrinsic arguments are often of a utilitarian nature. Thus arguments are made in respect of economic benefits to society–for instance, the role of the culture industry in wealth creation and employment. Similarly in an education context, arts education can sometimes be advocated as a means of increasing student performance in other subjects, by encouraging motivation to learn, or by developing other routes to learning the so-called core subjects (i.e., Maths, languages, etc).
These extrinsic arguments are not trivial or unimportant. To argue for the intrinsic merits of art education need not mean the rejection of extrinsic factors. However, there is a basis upon which a rationale for art education can be established which transcends the extrinsic/intrinsic divide. This basis resides in education policy itself and in particular the relationship between the learning objectives of general education and the qualities that an education in art can develop in learners.
Trends in Education Policy
So what is happening in education policy nationally and internationally? And what are the implications for art education in particular?
In the Republic of Ireland the White Paper Charting Our Education Future published in 1995 [1] emphasised the enhancement of personal qualities of autonomous learning and critical awareness as objectives of general education policy. Recent initiatives in curriculum reform and support for schools—for example through In-career Development Programmes and through the IT2000 initiative—are designed to enable teachers to facilitate a process of student learning which is critical, self-directed and open-ended. This is in marked contrast to the tradition of teacher- and subject-centred education that has dominated western education systems for the past century.
Similar developments are occurring internationally. The European Union has produced its first White Paper on education, Teaching and Learning: Towards the Learning Society (1995 [2]). This paper identified three main elements required of education for the new millennium:
- expanding the range and form of student knowledge (involving a re-evaluation of the general culture)
- developing skills of autonomous learning through lifelong learning
- fostering critical awareness
The concept of ‘the learning society' locates education at the centre of a process of transformation of society. It stresses for example the need to develop in all learners the critical faculties necessary to comprehend the meaning and significance of things and to make informed judgements about them. It brings together the needs of society and of the individual in a mutually supportive relationship.
An international survey (OECD, 1995 [3]) of the views of adult citizens on various education matters reveals some significant priorities and dichotomies in respect of what society expects and what schools offer:
- when asked to identify the most important qualities which schools should be seeking to foster, the most highly rated were self-confidence and work-related attributes
- when asked to rate school subjects in importance, maths and mother tongue were, predictably rated by far the most important, and equally predictably yet sadly, physical education and the arts were rated the least important
- respondents indicated that the development of qualities was more important than subjects
- a significant majority felt that schools were well able to teach subjects but quite inadequate in developing those very qualities which were seen as their most important mission.
The dichotomies lie in the failure to make the connections between what an education in the arts (lowly regarded) could contribute to the development of such areas as self-confidence (highly regarded).
Qualities of an Arts Education
Current research (NFER, 1998 [4]) in the U.K. throws some light on aspects of arts education in schools. The research identifies a range of effects of arts education (including visual art) as follows:
- effects on pupils (including knowledge/understanding, skills, personal and social development)
- effects on the school (impact on school ethos, pastoral system, behaviour management, school image)
- effects on the local community (impact on parents, school management board, local community)
- art itself as an outcome (art as product or performance)
Of particular significance in this categorisation is the range of effects of arts education on pupils, as perceived both by teachers and pupils themselves. Twelve areas of impact on pupils were identified (see table below).
| Effects of Arts Education on Pupils |
Domains of experience |
| 1. Knowledge and appreciation of artforms |
critical study and interpretative skills, historical contexts |
| 2. Knowledge and appreciation of social and cultural domain |
traditions, social issues |
| 3. Knowledge and appreciation of the affective domain |
emotions, spirituality |
| 4. Technical skills in the arts or artform |
tone, texture, movement, improvisation |
| 5. Communication and expressive skills |
language, critical listening, self-expression |
| 6. Thinking and creativity skills |
problem-solving, reflection, imagination |
| 7. Personal development and self-awareness |
understanding self, self esteem, self confidence |
| 8. Personal skills |
sense of responsibility, autonomy, organisational skills, independence |
| 9. Awareness of others |
tolerance, sensitivity, empathy, valuing of others and their work |
| 10. Social skills |
teamwork, co-operation, negotiation, life skills, co-operation, forming better relationships |
| 11. Intrinsic well-being effects |
enjoyment, fulfilment, pleasure, therapeutic outcomes, physical confidence |
| 12. Extrinsic transfer effects |
transfers to other areas of learning, employment, leisure involvement |
This inventory constitutes a comprehensive overview of the possible effects of an arts education. Of more significance than the identification and listing, however, is the weight of perceived importance of these various effects, as notified by teachers and pupils. Effects related to Personal Development (Category 7 in the table) were identified by both teachers and pupils as being the most significant effects of arts education: this held true for visual art as well as for the other arts subjects (Drama, Dance, English, Music) included in the survey.
After the personal development effect, the most prominent rating was given to aspects of extrinsic learning, in particular the transfer of learning form the art subject to other school and examination subjects. While both teachers and pupils proposed this area as a positive effect of the experience of arts education, the research analysis of comparative performance as measured by achievement at public examinations did not substantiate the claims.
This latter finding is supported by the Project Zero (1999 [5]) research team in Harvard who conclude that their studies "do not allow us to conclude that arts education has a causal effect on cognitive outcomes beyond the arts." While the U.K. and U.S. research is still in train, of course no firm conclusions can be drawn from it. But it is possible to make some general hypotheses supported by this research and by the wisdom of other educational researchers and commentators:
- Arts education makes a unique and important contribution to the development of those personal dispositions, skills and attitudes which are seen as the central priorities of education for the new millennium.
- Arts education is not a supportive function for other realms of learning but an integral educational experience in its own right.
- The role of arts education will only be enhanced if the policy priorities currently identified at national and international levels are translated into practice.
Perhaps the most compelling approach to education currently influencing practitioners and policy makers is that associated with the theories of multiple intelligences [6] and emotional intelligence [7]. This approach recognises that people learn in different ways and that different forms of learning contribute to a holistic education. An American commentator highlights the neurological basis for these concepts of intelligence. He instances emotion as a body and brain system that activates our attention system:
Emotion and attention (which are central to all activity in the arts) often lead us to important rational behaviours that wouldn't have emerged if we hadn't walked through that arts-enhanced doorway. Emotion drives attention, and attention drives learning, problem-solving, behaviour and just about everything else. [8]
Emotion and attention are not satisfactorily resolved within the security of a correct answer, the security that has been the hallmark of our education system in the past. By the same token, they are not amenable to measurement in traditional assessment systems.
Visual Art and the Changing Context of Irish Education
The rhetoric of Irish curriculum policy has changed dramatically over the past fifteen years. The statement by the Curriculum and Examination Board that "an imaginative failure can be more educationally worthwhile than a correct but poorly understood response" [9] remains a subversive statement underpinning policy development. It finds an echo in Sylwester's comments in the U.S. context. As an approach to learning, it expresses the heart of an arts education, where there is no correct, objective response but an endless series of possibilities for successful resolutions, mediated through skilled application of quality learning.
Recent and current revision of curriculum provision in schools gives rise to optimism tempered with reservations. On the optimistic side, the thrust of curriculum policy in general is to support the values that have always been at the heart of education in art, craft and design. The revised Primary Curriculum, shortly to be issued to schools, fosters those values—for example creativity, integration, and personal investigation—both in its overall orientation and in its treatment of the arts.
At second level, the Transition Year Programme (TYP) has been a major national innovation, currently offered in about 75% of schools. The philosophy of the TYP is particularly amenable to art education, and most schools incorporate an arts (usually visual art) experience as part of the programme. The new Leaving Certificate Applied is the only national certificate programme that specifies the arts as a required experience for all participating students. Dedicated courses in the Visual Arts as a vocational specialism are also included.
The Junior Certificate examination programme in Art, Craft, Design was introduced in 1992 and marked a significant watershed in visual art education in this state. The new syllabus has received a very positive response from teachers and from pupils as providing a comprehensive treatment of the subject. A new Leaving Certificate syllabus has recently been drafted and is currently being addressed in the light of responses received through a public consultative process.
These positive developments in art education conceal certain problems, however. The high quality of the Junior Certificate course, for instance, brings with it extra demands on pupils, on teachers and on school administration. Anecdotal evidence exists to the effect that this may have the result of reducing the inclination if not the capacity of schools to offer the subject to pupils. A similar scenario may await the new Leaving Certificate Art syllabus.
Currently, the take-up of Art as a subject at junior cycle is about 33%: this puts Art, Craft, Design at about tenth in the popularity list of subjects. At Leaving Certificate level, the proportion taking Art is about 16%, roughly thirteenth in the list of popular subjects. Perhaps more disconcerting is the rate of dropout [10]; nearly 57% of 1994 Junior Certificate Art, Craft, Design candidates did not sit the exam for Art in the 1996 Leaving Certificate. (Music, at 86% dropout, displayed the highest dropout rate: is there a message here for arts educators?).
The gender dimension of art education is also a major factor of concern. The pattern of female predominance in take-up of Art at school is replicated in third-level art education. In terms of art education, however, a form of ‘double jeopardy' may be seen to operate: teaching is itself an increasingly female-dominated profession, Art teaching even more so.
The recent government Green Paper Adult Education in an Era of Lifelong Learning [11] describes an important policy initiative in Irish education. While a Green Paper is of its nature only a discussion paper, it is disappointing to note that, in an otherwise excellent, challenging and inspiring document, the capacity of the visual arts to contribute to the lifelong learning priorities outlined in the paper is almost entirely neglected. It is to be hoped that the promised White Paper will address this deficit.
The treatment of Art in the curriculum of schools, the subsequent development of art education in further and higher education and the role of art in an emerging programme of lifelong learning are all bound up with each other. The opportunities for development are, I believe, unprecedented.
The claims for the value of arts education in general, and visual art in particular, have been won at the level of rhetoric. It is up to us in the field of art education to ensure that those values are translated into practice, not just in Art but in education generally.
Gary Granville is Head of Education at the National College of Art and Design, Dublin.
