In a message dated 12/11/01 8:53:43 Central Standard Time,
kherbert@houston.rr.com writes:
> Please don’t think of it as them using up artists. Be glad you have teachers
> that see art as a positive force in education. How ever far they go with
> the artists there will always be something additional for you to add. Sorry
> if that sounds harsh but it is a Pet Peeve of mine....
Well now... I certainly see your point and agree, I'm not saying
it's a bad thing for this to happen, but on the other hand,
it's a bit perplexing for me on a few different levels...
given the resources available at my school and in my head, I'm not
sure what I can add to build on an experience similar to the one
I described...
Another problem comes when one teacher does something like
this and the other grade level teachers do not. Given that
I plan for all the classes of a certain grade level together, it's difficult
if one class has so much more experience and information
on a certain subject than others.
Another example is the kinder teacher that did very elaborate
self-portraits ~ mirrors, proportion, skin tone, the whole
nine yards ~ (they were great!) ... and the other kinder teacher
did not. How do you integrate this kind of art experience for those
that didn't get it in the classroom without teaching entirely
different lessons for the same grade level? or do you?
The third problem is that most of this I find out by accident...
that this particular teacher always does a unit on Van Gogh
I find out when I take something to her room; that this teacher
usually does tessellations I find out from the librarian...
that this teacher fits Starry Night into her astronomy unit...
it's fabulous that art goes in and through so many areas of the
curriculum, but it makes it a little hard for the art specialist to
plan unless you've been around for a while... and my gut feeling
(as a new teacher) is that some classroom teachers do view what
they do with art in their classrooms as somewhat proprietary?
just musing...
