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: ART TRAINING CONTINUED...

[ Thread ][ Subject ][ Author ][ Date ]
Mcracker (Mcracker)
Wed, 7 Jan 1998 21:50:55 EST


In a message dated 98-01-07 18:03:38 EST, robprod writes:

<< The basic reason they are allowed to stay at a low level of
proficency in art at the elementary level is simply because they are
not taught in the same sequence order of content as they are in other
disciplines. There is little continuity in art at the elementary levels
of instruction. If we taught other subjects in the same hit-and-miss
vein, we would be in deep trouble! >>
Robert-
I think that the real reason (or one of them,anyway) that our students lack
proficiency and confidence in art is the amount of time devoted to the study
of this subject rather than the training the art specialist has had. In our
school district, we have a very sequential elementary curriculum in which
students are taught about brush choice, use and care as well as how to talk
about and look at works created by themselves as well as artists from other
times and places. They still have art only once a week with a specialist for
45 mins. The classroom teachers do need more classes in art, but I don't think
ours would feel very comfortable being their students' primary instuctors in
art, with even two college methods courses. Reading, writing and even
computing are given a greater share of the school day, by far than art. In my
middle school, students watch a t.v. news program for 12 mins. every day (=36
hrs. per year) and have art for a 7 week period (=27 hrs. per year). Band
students have 134 hrs. of instruction per year! Figure out which areas they
are highly proficient in!
Marcia Thompson