Note: To protect the privacy of our members, e-mail addresses have been removed from the archived messages. As a result, some links may be broken.
I have always enjoyed integrating my art curriculum with the general ed
curriculum for a variety of reasons that I'd always thought were
educationally sound, including the findings on brain research, and
claims that artistic processes enhanced learning in other content areas.
Now comes Elliot Eisner saying "Not so fast!" ("Does Experience in the
Arts Promote Academic Achievement: What Research Says." NAEA Session
3/25/99). These so-called claims are not necessarily true, and promoting
arts education on the basis of such claims does not provide a solid
foundation for arts programs. This was also a concern expressed by Lani
Duke in her NAEA address to the general session. I understood these
learned scholars to imply that, in teaching and in promoting art
education, the emphasis should be on art learning, rather than what art
can do for other subjects. But does this mean we should avoid
integrating art with other content areas? Will integrated art ultimately
weaken the position of the arts as worthy content areas? Does anyone
care to discuss this issue?
Also did anyone hear Eisner discuss the uses of performance assessment
Linda in Michigan's cold, rainy gloom