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.
cape girardeau, mo
--- LynnMarie Paris <paris> wrote:
> Hi Tiffany,
> As for my personal preference...I prefer the
> approach that you labeled as
> Disciplined, but only when prefaced with a course
> like Studio Art. I am
> not sure how common this is in other areas of the
> country but in New York
> the students must take a full year of Studio Art
> before they may take the
> other "advanced" courses, such as ceramics, drawing
> and painting,
> sculpture, stained glass, etc....
> And, I am curious as to the difference between
> SPECIALIZED and MEDIA BASED
> designs. Isn't the description of Specialized,
> media based? I truly am
> interested in the difference between the two.
> I do agree with you that the Conceptual approach
> would likely be a
> disaster. Those concepts, (line, shape, etc) should
> be taught WITHIN the
> other designs of curriculum.
> I hope this helped a bit.
> tiffany Marquart wrote:
> > My question is, those of you who teach at the
> > secondary level, what style of curriculum do you
> prefer? TRADITIONAL:
> > Art I, Art II, etc.?
> > DISCIPLINED: Drawing I (etc), Ceramics I,IIetc,
> Painting I, II etc..?
> > or SPECIALIZED: Watercolors I, II, Oil/acrylic
> painting I, II etc.,
> > Weaving I, etc etc. There are several other
> curriculum designs
> > mentioned, however, I don't see those being real
> successful (such as
> > Media based curriculum, 2D & 3D based curriculum,
> Conceptual (Line,
> > shape etc..)). If anyone has any suggestions or
> ideas or dreams,
> > please let me know, I'd greatly appreciate it.
> Also, pros & cons would
> > be great too. Thanks.
Do You Yahoo!?
Bid and sell for free at http://auctions.yahoo.com