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.
>Are you oriented to a project type of el ed exp?
>Are you oriented towards a comprehensive multi-discipline >approach?
>How important is it for your students to know the historical
>foundations for art ed?
>What do you sense are the kinds of questions our field
>Are your el ed teachers going to teach art? No art teachers in
Thanks for your response (and others who have responded to this topic). You
have posed some excellent questions. In reflection I have decided I am not
as dissatisfied with the Hurwitz and Day text as I am with the amount of time
I have for contact with my students. Our methods course follows a
comprehensive approach to teaching art that embraces the model made popular
by DBAE (although I believe quality instruction in art has always included
this multi-discipline approach).
Our methods course meets two hours per week for the semester and includes art
majors/minors and non art majors/minors. The varied backgrounds with art
provide good discussions. The text material is supplemented with journal
articles and other readings from "Studies in Art" and various other sources.
A high percentage of our graduates teach in schools where there is no art
specialist. And for the non-majors, the notion that talking about art,
artists, and art history in addition to creating art is a revelation. So on
the one hand I sense some frustration for all the topics I don't get to; and
on the other hand it is a very rewarding teaching experience.
Mary Kolf Tapia recommended utilizing Gardner's work with multiple
intelligences. Her Dec. 6 post states:
>It answers the question - Why art?- beyond art for art sake. >In terms of a
text for your art methods course...
With all of this said and done, I'm still interested and perhaps curious
about what others are using for texts and course materials.