Child art: Fiction and non fiction inspirations
https://www.pinterest.com/alandste/child-art/
Introduction
How do we understand, truly, child art? Certainly, child art is one of intrigue and wonder. However, what I seek to understand is how children respond to fiction and non fiction readings both in the classroom and art room through visual creations. How do students come to understand what they read, how it circles around in their memories and brain, then posits itself onto paper in the form of images? Through this collection of child art I have photographed from my school, Powder Springs Elementary, I hope to uncover how students make sense and respond to what they read and if any of their own influence make an appearance.
Delving into Child Art
To start, Bruner (2004) points out that learning takes place in a variety of places, there is no such thing as generalized learning, learning takes place in some ongoing context (p. 18). All these artworks demonstrate that the student learned in one context and exemplified it in another context. Students used a visual modality to show their learning. The teacher had not hand in the ways in which students organized their work. However, in lower grades, such as Kindergarten, we do see the teacher guides visual response; the measure of learning is sought through different means such as questioning through the process. Such is the case in the artwork inspired by “The Hungry Caterpillar” and “Mister Seahorse”. The product was already determined by the teacher, but the process of learning color, color mixing, movement, and texture were derived from interaction through literature and the process of responding to it.
Demonstrating learning
Learning is an ongoing process both of art, through art, and demonstrated by art. The author, Weitz (1956), postulates that art is an open concept and truly understanding it is a journey. Weitz (1956) also believes that one can apply learning through studying art. By comparing the ‘Wizard of Oz’, ‘Famous Inventors’, and ‘Friends’ artworks, one can see that students demonstrated their learning through their artwork. The ‘Famous Inventors’ art not only shows that students learned about the inventor they researched, but they demonstrated their understanding of abstract art and the printmaking process. Also, the ‘Wizard of Oz’ work demonstrates students understanding of the land from the book they chose to further investigate and their technical ability to understand value and monochromatic paintings. Even looking at the ‘Friends’ art of Kindergarten students shows that learning took place as students demonstrate their comprehension of the book and the concept of creating their ‘Friend’.
Reflective
When looking at all the artwork, one can almost visualize the students creating them. However, what actually goes into the process and are students actively making selections and choices as they work? Eisner (1978) believes that through Art as Experience students pull deep within themselves and evaluate their art (p. 7). I understand this as active engagement in the process of art and students being more reflective individuals through art. Creating a work of art can be quick splashes of blobs on a piece of paper. Nevertheless, thoughtful compositions take consideration and choices within the process. Wolf (1988) also points to how students become reflective learners and that the final work does not tell the whole story of the artistic journey (p. 144). To truly convey a message or tell a store, students must reflect on their work. Looking at “Elmer’s day parade”, “Humpty Dumpty”, “The dot”, and the Kindergarten “We’re off to see the wizard” one can see the thoughtful consideration that went into these pieces. Students had to consider how to create their compositions to demonstrate their understanding of what they read. While painting “The dot”, students made color choices, placement choices, and even deeper consideration of planning with how to create a ‘not dot’. For “Elmer’s day parade”, students had to decide how to depict the jungle Elmer lives in and also how to make their Elmer patchwork like in the book. Through the “Humpty Dumpty” project, we can see that students had to make choices about the location of their Humpty and also how to illustrate their background so that it looks like a wall. Finally, the Kindergarten ‘Wizard of Oz’ art shows that the student understood that the Tin man joined Dorothy and traveled with her on her journey. All these artworks show the careful choices students made regarding their subject matter in order to demonstrate their understanding of selected readings.
Everyone is different
Through the process of trying to understand and interpret child art, one needs to keep an open mind and remember that not all children learn and demonstrate learning in the same ways. Gardner (2002) champions the idea of multiple intelligences and to understand the product by “... make[ing] assessments about whether these tasks have been performed intelligently-even as we can agree to disagree about the conclusions reached” (p. 141). The products show that students used multiple intelligences through the process in order to get their desired product. For example, when looking at the metal reposes, we can almost see the students carefully drawing their animals onto the foil and the careful focus they implemented to make their animal come to life. We can even compare their two different works, the turtle and butterfly, and note the different artistic decisions of how to show the animal, treatment of the background, and arrangement of the positive space. B. Wilson and M. Wilson (1981) believe that classifying students based on the intelligence they use to attack a project does the students a disservice. Generalizing students disregards the fact they all learn, interact, and process differently. Comparing the two (fig. 1) demonstrates a student who placed thoughtful consideration into their color choices and placement. While the other student (fig. 2) seemed to have spent more, time making his cityscape more realistic with the clock tower and doors and windows on buildings.
References
Bruner, J. (2004). A short history of psychological theories of learning. Daedalus, 133(1), 13-20.
Eisner, E. W. (1978). What do children learn when they paint?. Art Education, 31(3), 6-10. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/3192254
Gardner, H. (2002). On the three faces of intelligence. Daedalus, 131(1), 139-142.
Weitz, M. (1956). The role of theory in aesthetics. The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, 15(1), 27-35.
Wilson, B., & Wilson, M. (1981). The use and uselessness of developmental stages. Art Education, 34(5), 4-5.
Wolf, D. (1988). Artistic learning: What and where is it?. Journal of Aesthetic Education, 22(1), 143-155. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/3332971
Introduction
How do we understand, truly, child art? Certainly, child art is one of intrigue and wonder. However, what I seek to understand is how children respond to fiction and non fiction readings both in the classroom and art room through visual creations. How do students come to understand what they read, how it circles around in their memories and brain, then posits itself onto paper in the form of images? Through this collection of child art I have photographed from my school, Powder Springs Elementary, I hope to uncover how students make sense and respond to what they read and if any of their own influence make an appearance.
Delving into Child Art
To start, Bruner (2004) points out that learning takes place in a variety of places, there is no such thing as generalized learning, learning takes place in some ongoing context (p. 18). All these artworks demonstrate that the student learned in one context and exemplified it in another context. Students used a visual modality to show their learning. The teacher had not hand in the ways in which students organized their work. However, in lower grades, such as Kindergarten, we do see the teacher guides visual response; the measure of learning is sought through different means such as questioning through the process. Such is the case in the artwork inspired by “The Hungry Caterpillar” and “Mister Seahorse”. The product was already determined by the teacher, but the process of learning color, color mixing, movement, and texture were derived from interaction through literature and the process of responding to it.
Demonstrating learning
Learning is an ongoing process both of art, through art, and demonstrated by art. The author, Weitz (1956), postulates that art is an open concept and truly understanding it is a journey. Weitz (1956) also believes that one can apply learning through studying art. By comparing the ‘Wizard of Oz’, ‘Famous Inventors’, and ‘Friends’ artworks, one can see that students demonstrated their learning through their artwork. The ‘Famous Inventors’ art not only shows that students learned about the inventor they researched, but they demonstrated their understanding of abstract art and the printmaking process. Also, the ‘Wizard of Oz’ work demonstrates students understanding of the land from the book they chose to further investigate and their technical ability to understand value and monochromatic paintings. Even looking at the ‘Friends’ art of Kindergarten students shows that learning took place as students demonstrate their comprehension of the book and the concept of creating their ‘Friend’.
Reflective
When looking at all the artwork, one can almost visualize the students creating them. However, what actually goes into the process and are students actively making selections and choices as they work? Eisner (1978) believes that through Art as Experience students pull deep within themselves and evaluate their art (p. 7). I understand this as active engagement in the process of art and students being more reflective individuals through art. Creating a work of art can be quick splashes of blobs on a piece of paper. Nevertheless, thoughtful compositions take consideration and choices within the process. Wolf (1988) also points to how students become reflective learners and that the final work does not tell the whole story of the artistic journey (p. 144). To truly convey a message or tell a store, students must reflect on their work. Looking at “Elmer’s day parade”, “Humpty Dumpty”, “The dot”, and the Kindergarten “We’re off to see the wizard” one can see the thoughtful consideration that went into these pieces. Students had to consider how to create their compositions to demonstrate their understanding of what they read. While painting “The dot”, students made color choices, placement choices, and even deeper consideration of planning with how to create a ‘not dot’. For “Elmer’s day parade”, students had to decide how to depict the jungle Elmer lives in and also how to make their Elmer patchwork like in the book. Through the “Humpty Dumpty” project, we can see that students had to make choices about the location of their Humpty and also how to illustrate their background so that it looks like a wall. Finally, the Kindergarten ‘Wizard of Oz’ art shows that the student understood that the Tin man joined Dorothy and traveled with her on her journey. All these artworks show the careful choices students made regarding their subject matter in order to demonstrate their understanding of selected readings.
Everyone is different
Through the process of trying to understand and interpret child art, one needs to keep an open mind and remember that not all children learn and demonstrate learning in the same ways. Gardner (2002) champions the idea of multiple intelligences and to understand the product by “... make[ing] assessments about whether these tasks have been performed intelligently-even as we can agree to disagree about the conclusions reached” (p. 141). The products show that students used multiple intelligences through the process in order to get their desired product. For example, when looking at the metal reposes, we can almost see the students carefully drawing their animals onto the foil and the careful focus they implemented to make their animal come to life. We can even compare their two different works, the turtle and butterfly, and note the different artistic decisions of how to show the animal, treatment of the background, and arrangement of the positive space. B. Wilson and M. Wilson (1981) believe that classifying students based on the intelligence they use to attack a project does the students a disservice. Generalizing students disregards the fact they all learn, interact, and process differently. Comparing the two (fig. 1) demonstrates a student who placed thoughtful consideration into their color choices and placement. While the other student (fig. 2) seemed to have spent more, time making his cityscape more realistic with the clock tower and doors and windows on buildings.
References
Bruner, J. (2004). A short history of psychological theories of learning. Daedalus, 133(1), 13-20.
Eisner, E. W. (1978). What do children learn when they paint?. Art Education, 31(3), 6-10. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/3192254
Gardner, H. (2002). On the three faces of intelligence. Daedalus, 131(1), 139-142.
Weitz, M. (1956). The role of theory in aesthetics. The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, 15(1), 27-35.
Wilson, B., & Wilson, M. (1981). The use and uselessness of developmental stages. Art Education, 34(5), 4-5.
Wolf, D. (1988). Artistic learning: What and where is it?. Journal of Aesthetic Education, 22(1), 143-155. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/3332971