This drive for standards and benchmarks and documentation of every
damn detail has me really preplexed. If these administrators had to detail
and document their love making they would have never reproduced. Well,
perhaps that wouldn't be a bad idea at that. They want to take all the fun
and joy out of learning and teaching. I suppose kids do master scissors and
other tools but when to introduce something is when they need it. It's that
simple, no more. And, line is never not taught it's just an ongoing process
of development, sensitivity and awareness as to it's multitude of possibilities.
In art the process of sequence is reversed anyway. At just about the
when students start to stop being creative, the real artists among them begin
the process of trying to revert to being a child again.
I don't give my principle lesson plans, I've given up trying to educate her.
I offered to put up student art on a bulletin board two days ago but asked
another teacher put up paper hearts instead.
Woody in KC
> The National Standards were more criteria/concept oriented. What I find
> incomprehensible-way beyond my right brain-is that they wanted me to detail ,
> what I would catagorize as "methods". When do you introduce "scissors" and
> when and how do they "master "scissors. When and how do you introduce "Line"
> as an art Element, and when do they "master"line..........
> Honestly -this is beyond me . And I'm lost as how to sequence-art history,
> clay and glazes, watercolor painting, critique, etc.........could we go on
> for pages and pages here?????..............
> I'm ready to look for another job. What anal person took a beautiful left
> brained activity and made it into an obsessively endless writing activity????
> Forgive me-if you've done this, but the complete half of my left brain went
> to my brother who is a nuclear physicist.
> Can anyone help me???