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: [Fwd: DBAE REPLY]

[ Thread ][ Subject ][ Author ][ Date ]
Larry Hurt (lhurt)
Sat, 24 Jan 1998 23:39:05 +0000


Robert Beeching wrote:
>
> --
> MZ*
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Subject: Re: DBAE REPLY
> Date: Sat, 24 Jan 1998 15:03:07 -0800
> From: Robert Beeching <robprod>
> Organization: Robert Beeching Productions
> To: "Bill Morgan, EXT:0908" <morganb.EDU>
> References: <733AD675954.EDU>
>
> Bill Morgan, EXT:0908 wrote:
>
> > Robert,
> >
> > Only last week did I sign on to the artsednet Digest, and discovered
> > people thanking you, personally, for filling them in about DBAE.
> >
> > I have just come from the academic library, where I photocopied
> > everything that the ERIC database produced on DBAE and/or Elliot
> > Eisner. Would you mind sending me an electronic copy of the "most
> > excellent" synopsis that everyone else read but I missed?
> >
> > I am performing a lit review on methods and instruments for
> > evaluating arts programs in elementary schools (may develop into a
> > dissertation proposal, this Summer).
> >
> > Cudos,
> >
> > Bill
> >
> > William L. Morgan, Ed.S.
> > Edith Bowen Lab School
> > Utah State University
> > Logan, Utah 84322-6700
> >
> > (435) 797-3085
> > morganb
>
> Hello Bill,
>
> I will dig out an article on DBAE which was published in 1986/87 in
> response to the intrusion of GETTY into the field of art education. The
> thrust of the issue is that with an annual budget of 96 million dollars
> allocated to the Getty Education Institute, it becomes a formidable
> force in the field of art education. Stanford professor, Elliot Eisner
> was brought on board to design DBAE. It seems obvious to many of us in
> the field that the cannons of DBAE: Aesthetics, Analysis, Criticism, and
> Production (at the bottom) leads one to assume that DBAE is a vehicle to
> promote the extensive Getty art collection under the guise of general
> art education. Getty has offered doctoral candidates stipends and grants
> to further the cause of the Getty.
>
> The people at Florida State are deep into the Getty program as well as
> some in Texas. These are my personal observations, and not necessarily
> held by others. What concerns me the most is that Getty has down-played
> the need for process/skill formation in favor of a revised type of
> watered down
> art appreciation course. School administrators like it because 1) it
> costs nothing to institute, and 2) elementary classroom teachers like
> it, because it takes very little knowledge of art processes, and is easy
> to accommodate within their current class schedules.
>
> I'll get back to you.
>
> Bob
>
> --
> MZ*
Greetings all:

Before we continue the discussion about DBAE can we please distinguish
between inaccurate oral history and reality.

Eliot Eisner did not develop DBAE. It's origins can be traced to the
original work of 17 art educators in 1982 who met with the J. Paul Getty
Trust to discuss establishing a center for education in the arts. The
center was opened the following year with LeiLani Lattin-Duke named as
head.

The original teacher institutes were headed by W. Dwaine Greer, who
originiated the term discipline-based art education (DBAE), "noting that
it was derived from ideas first surfaced in the 1960's even though
current theory was a departure from these antecendants." (Efland)
(Do some investigating into the work of Michael Day and Gil Clark as
well).

The Getty's publication debut was Beyond Creating: The Place For Art In
America's Schools (1984). The outlined framework consisted of
aesthetics, criticism, history, and production. (not analysis)

If you do some checking into the state proficiencies in the U.S., you
will find some form of the DBAE framework in nearly every one. It isn't
a fad or an up and coming question...it is here, and for anyone who has
really explored the depth and possibility, it has opened up a wealth of
new directions. (Which has not decreased production...it has enriched
it. I continue to be amazed by the misinformation floating around
concerning the subject)

I strongly recommend that anyone who is interested in the subject pick
up a copy of Arthur Efland's History of Art Education or any of the
hundreds of articles on the subject. As with any framework, it has its
limitations. But it also opens art education to a wealth of new
richness!

Larry