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: non art certified possible?

[ Thread ][ Subject ][ Author ][ Date ]
Mon, 1 Nov 1999 19:26:20 EST

In a message dated 11/1/99 5:26:50 PM Eastern Standard Time,
Wizzlewolf writes:

<< >>

Thanks for all your varied replies to my practical question. It seems that
some of you have made some (only some!) assumptions though that are pretty

For just a moment I think it would be wise to step out of our boxes and think
less subjectively. There are so many assumptions about what makes a good
education and a good educator and those assumptions are culture bound, though
they are not absolute truths, though they can be quite practical and even
wise at times. That being said, I think some of us need to realize that
teachers are not circus animals. I do not go to college to be trained. ( I
have several degrees by the way and a very broad academic background) I
think the term training is demeaning to the profession. I go to school to be
educated, to garner knowledge and use it wisely. Did some of you who rant
and rave about people like me who are not trained as art educators every
happen to consider that someone like me may be wholly equipped to teach art
without being trained. Perhaps better than a few highly trained individuals
here, who are more concerned with the dues they feel they have paid and who
resent those who have "supposedly" not paid their dues. Many seem to think
that it is impossible, but that is not entirely true, though I grant you that
more often than not an untrained art teacher will not be as effective as a
trained one. However, there are exceptions and to rule out anyone who has
never been "trained" is not reasonable or aware. Perhaps I am someone who
would be terrible as an art teacher and perhaps I would not be. Thats not
the point of my post here though. My intention is to ask you to consider
what it is that makes a teacher effective, and whether or not your criteria
for that is so culture bound that it has become an absolute in a box. I
certainly don't have an interest in teaching art because I think it is fun or
easy and without knowing me it is useless to make those kind of
characterizations. And finally, I know that teachers who are not trained in
a subject can be highly effective professionals, happens frequently and
sometimes they are so untrained that they do better. Those individuals I
know are educated, open and motivated and have something treasured to share,
that meets the needs of students. I have seen the opposite as well, in fact
where I used to teach the art teacher is making a mess of things and he is
not certified. It all depends on the individual. But certainly, teachers are
far more than their training, training which by the way is given mainly by
those who really don't know children, don't teach children any longer and are
often pushing what the political machinery of education currently says is the
right approach and above all is so culture bound. Three cheers for teachers
who recognize that we are far more than trained specimens and that we can go
out of our little boxes.