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.

Lesson Plans

Re: More on elementary generalists and art specialists

[ Thread ][ Subject ][ Author ][ Date ]
Elizabeth Paul (epaul)
Tue, 21 Jan 1997 21:17:06 -0600

Thanks, Fred, well said. I'd love to be in a school with a specialist like
you to draw on; those teachers are really lucky. That last paragraph is what
I was referring to in my previous email. I knew I had read that argument

At 08:09 PM 1/21/97 -0500, you wrote:
>Good points, Elizabeth,
>Being an art specialist dosn't mean that I don't believe (how's that for
>sentence construction?) that the strength of elementary education resides in
>the fact that , historically, elementary education has been the home of the
>generalist. To the degree that schools have moved away from this strength,
>towards departmentalization for example, is a measure of how far they have
>moved away from this strength.
>This faulty dualism: generalist v specialist or art v science (as was argued
>a few months ago) treats teaching and learning as something way too easily
>compartmentalized. Classroom teachers are my allies. If they have
>difficulties with teaching the arts, I try to help. If I'm looking for a way
>to bring literature into my artroom, (and I often do) I go to them. If we
>disagree about approaches, we discuss it. If we can't agree, we go on and
>come back together another day.
>To argue that teaching art in the regular classroom is a threat to the
>employment of art teachers is really bogus. Yeh. Our employment status is
>always iffy. But that comes from the much bigger issue of the degree to which
>the culture values culture. But the classroom teacher bringing the arts into
>their curriculum is not a problem by itself. It provides a potential basis
>for joint work.
>Keep it up Elizabeth.

  • Reply: Christine Beth Johnson: "I've waited- now-Re: More on elementary generalists and art specialists"