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: inquiry skills

[ Thread ][ Subject ][ Author ][ Date ]
henry (taylorh)
Wed, 15 May 1996 10:09:46 -0700 (MST)


On Tue, 14 May 1996, Sally L Shumard wrote:

> I am currently teaching preservice art teachers
> to construct meaningful lessons in an introductory art methods course.
> The greatest difficulty I have had to date is teaching the students to
> include higher order thinking strategies in their plans. Past practice
> has allowed them to teach their students content about artwork and
> artists through rote memorization; i.e., "Who created this painting,"
> "What is its title," "What else did he/she paint,"etc. In order to
> illustrate excellent inquiry techniques, I have saved many of the
> postings to this listserve to share with my students.

Hi Sally,

Thought about this driving back the thirty miles from dropping the kids
at school today.

The attribution of a work. "Who created this painting?" So often in class
we present this information in an academic manner: "[This painting} was
painted in [year] by [artist]." It is not an uncommon presentation even
in terms of DBAE. But if we consider the disciplines we have an
opportunity to pursue attribution in a more "discipline based" manner. It
has not been unheard of to find (years later) that what we were taught and
tested on in school, "the facts", are no longer "correct" and that
that.... let us say Rembrandt, is no longer a Rembrandt but only "School of
Rembrandt" or even deleted from the texts (whisper forgery) and no longer
discussed.

Might we not take this as an opportunity to procede as the discipline in
the case of attribution. Explore how attribution is achieved, question
authenticity... (imagine the headlines... Sixth grade class discovers
unknown Giotto at Met!) :-) Seriously tho. WHY NOT pursue the
exploration of art not as so many facts for memorization (who, what, when
where?) but rather as a serious (and enjoyable -read fun) process of
exploration and work using "higher order thinking strategies"? How has
this work become attributed to this painter? What qualities of the work
support the attribution? What is questionable. How do we find out more?
What other things could we look for to confirm or disconfirm attribution?
Is our determination the FINAL WORD? All kinds of things become possible,
all kinds of "higher order thinking strategies" employed.

OK Tell me out there. How many of you are already doing this? Who has
already published or presented similar propositions? Surely this must
already be commonplace in DBAE, I just missed it some how, RIGHT? Looking
back over what I was thinking out and just put down in this post it all
appears too obvious. Once again, I'm busy working on that NEW IDEA, "The
Wheel"....

ah well
it was fun while it lasted
henry