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


[ Thread ][ Subject ][ Author ][ Date ]
Robert Beeching (robprod)
Sat, 24 Jan 1998 13:53:27 -0800

James Linker wrote: 01/24/98

"...I imagine my life would be much easier if I were so certain just
what art is..."
"Art is a non-verbal language of human expression." Otherwise, there is
no issue here!

In reference to teaching basic skills and art appreciation...

"Just how are they to do this without the intellectual tools and
background knowledge necessary to make such comparisons of the arts to
our society?".

Are we putting the cart before the horse here? Are we talking about
stages in development? Undergraduate studies are quite different from
graduate studies. Most classroom teachers never attain a Ph.D. or an
Ed.D. They rarely are confronted by courses in "Epistemology",
"Aesthetics," or "Theories of Learning." But they do need to understand
how to present children with a scope and sequence approach to learning
art process and skill development. What is so "anti-intellectual" about

Esoteric language is fine for a dissertation, but why muddle up
undergraduate education with issues which do not directly affect the
teaching of the Visual Arts in the classroom? Beginning reading,
writing, and mathematical skills are taught in a direct fashion with
little if any intellectual inferences. Why not basic Visual Arts? All
the talk of aestheticism in the classroom where children don't even
know how to manipulate a pen or brush does little to further the cause
of art appreciation.