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.
> ...merely teaching the technique of what they do as artists would not be
> as rich of an experience as it could be...
Educators often focus on easily observable manual technique and behavior
and so fail to develop the cognitive strategies that are also in play.
The possibilities of achieving the kind of cognitive development inherent
to THE ARTS and simultaneously so valuable to THE SCIENCES, especially in
terms of aesthetics and critical analysis rarely reaches the student or
> The classroom teachers teach all four components of DBAE - including
> art-making/production. Many have criticized that this negates the need
> for art specialists and artists in residence but it's quite the opposite.
> The artists need to convey what is involved in making art besides the
> technique. I know in many of my sculptures, math has been essential.
> It's also valuable to know about influences (art history) and
> decision-making processes.
art MAKING offers more than the opportunity to practice the techniques of
calculation. There is, for example, the perception and valiation of pattern.
Whether in the obvious case of Geometry (everyone loves tesselations) or
in the examination of sheets of numerical data the ability to perceive
patterns, particularly useful patterns is paramount. One could easily
argue that without the development of skill in distinguishing patterns
and determining their relative values Mathematics, or for that matter
Science, COULD NOT EXIST!
Fortunately, (virtually all creatures, but in this instance our interest
lies in only one:) humans, their childern especially, are constrained to
distinguish pattern, despite the obstacles placed before them. Not
considering this quality worth development as a skill, education
generally (but not always) leaves any development of perception or
aesthetic discrimination to chance. For some reason which escapes me
any consideration of aesthetics or extention of skill in aesthetics (and
even criticism) is typically confined to the arts where it is popularly
assiciated with effete intellectualism despite its unrecognized use in
daily commerce. Ah well
This is probably obvious to all here I guess
I leave you with this question. Would you prefer Science and its
technology based in an approach to Art or Arts ruled by the laws of Science?