Post on 03-Apr-2018
7/28/2019 ATC Dissertation
1/220
THE FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY
COLLEGE OF VISUAL ARTS, THEATRE, AND DANCE
THE SHELF LIFE OF DBAE:ART TEACHER RETENTION OF DISCIPLINE-BASED ART EDUCATION
STRATEGIES IN THE CLASSROOM
By
ANN TIPPETTS CHRISTIANSEN
A Dissertation submitted to theDepartment of Art Education
in partial fulfillment of therequirements for the degree of
Doctor of Philosophy
Degree Awarded:Spring Semester, 2007
7/28/2019 ATC Dissertation
2/220
The members of the Committee approve the Dissertation of Ann TippettsChristiansen defended on March 1, 2007
Tom AndersonProfessor Directing Dissertation
Stanford OlsenOutside Committee Member
Pat VilleneuveCommittee Member
Melanie DavenportCommittee Member
Approved:
Marcia Rosal, Chair, Department of Art Education
Sally McRorie, Dean, School of Visual Arts, Theatre, and Dance
The Office of Graduate Studies has verified and approved the above namedcommittee members.
7/28/2019 ATC Dissertation
3/220
This dissertation is dedicated to my parents, Frank M. and Janet B. Tippetts, for
instilling in all of their children a strong work ethic, to my father for imbuing me
with a sense of the art world, and to my husband, Bill, and children, Nathan,
Shawn, Brandon, and Alissa for their unwavering support
of my goal to attain this degree.
7/28/2019 ATC Dissertation
4/220
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I wish to acknowledge thank the following people for their contributions to the
completion of this work:
Nathan and Shawn Christiansen for their electronic andgraphics expertise and willingness to share it
Tom Anderson for his guidance in writing and his
unflagging encouragement to stay the course under
exceptional circumstances
7/28/2019 ATC Dissertation
5/220
TABLE OF CONTENTS
List of Figures ................................................................................................ viii
Abstract ...................................................................................................... ix
1 INTRODUCTION 1
Problem Statement 4Guiding Question 4Supporting Questions 5Objectives of Study 5Personal Motivation 6Rationale for Study 6Justification of Study 7Scope and Limitations of Study 8Overview of Procedure and Methodology 8
Definition of Terms 9Summary 11
2 REVIEW OF LITERATURE 12
Part I: A Brief History 14Approaching the 21
stCentury 14
Behaviorism 14Progressivism 15Reconstructionism 15Social Efficiency 16
Between World Wars 16Education 16
Progressivism vs. Behaviorism 16Teacher Education 18
Normal Schools 18Standardized Teacher Training 18
Art Education 18Child-Centered Art 18Levels of Art Education 19
World War II to the Demand for Excellence 20Education 21
Progressivism Under Attack 21Education Reform 22Child-Centered Schools 23Excellence in Education 23
Teacher Education 24Art Education/Art Teacher Training 24Child-Centered Art Education 24Content-Based Art Education 26
Summary of History 29Part II: A Paradigm Shift 31
Discipline-Based Art Education 31Why Discipline-Based Art Education? 31
Art as a Subject of Study 32Art as a Discipline 32
DBAE Articulated 33
7/28/2019 ATC Dissertation
6/220
Justification for DBAE 33DBAE Content & Strategies 34DBAE Curricula 35
Art For Every Student 36DBAE Assessment 37
DBAE at Florida State University 37Graduate Degree Programs 38
The F.I.A.E. 39Diverging Paths 39
Choices in Art Education 40Critics of DBAE 40Comprehensive Art Education 42Visual Culture Art Education 43
Summary of Review of Literature 43
3 METHODOLOGY 46
Problem Statement 46Guiding Questions 46Supporting Questions 46
Objectives 47Non-technical Overview of the Study 49
Theoretical Foundation 50Phenomenological Research 51Qualitative Research 52
The Survey 55The Interviews 56Population 59Survey Sample 60Interview Sample 61
Procedures and Instruments: Overview 62Literature Review as a Tool 64Survey Instrument 65Interview instrument 66Coding the Data 67Reporting the Data 70
Summary 71
4 STUDY RESULTS 73
Guiding Question 73Supporting Questions 73Survey 74
Survey Participants 74Teacher A 75Teacher B 75Teacher C 76Teacher D 76Teacher E 77Teacher F 78Teacher G 79Teacher H 79Teacher I 80Teacher J 80Teacher K 81
7/28/2019 ATC Dissertation
7/220
Survey Responses 82Demographic Responses 82Descriptive Responses 89Evaluative Responses 96
Summary of the Survey Findings 101Demographic Findings 101Descriptive Findings 102
Evaluative Findings 104Interviews 105
Interview Participants 107Teacher E 107Teacher H 108Teacher I 108
Interview Responses 109Demographic Responses 109Descriptive Responses 119Evaluative Responses 127
Summary 137
5 CONCLUSIONS 138
Guiding Question of the Study 138Supporting Questions 138
Summaries of Responses to Supporting Questions 139Supporting Question 1 140Supporting Question 2 140Supporting Question 3 141Supporting Question 4 143
Emergent Foci 145Age and Experience 146Early Training 147Continued Education 147
Administrative Support 148Summary of the Findings Presented Thematically 150Conclusion 152Implications For Theory and Practice in Art Education 154Future Research 156
APPENDICES ................................................................................................
Appendix A: Survey Questions & Results 158Appendix B: Interviews Schedule & Results 170Appendix C: Human Subjects Committee Approval #1 194Appendix D: Informed Consent Form #1 195Appendix E: Human Subjects Committee Approval #2 196Appendix D: Informed Consent Form #2 197
REFERENCES ................................................................................................ 198
BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH .............................................................................. 211
7/28/2019 ATC Dissertation
8/220
LIST OF FIGURES
1. Teachers Ages............................................................................................. 82
2. Teachers Academic Degrees/Certificates...................................................... 84
3. Teachers School Levels............................................................................... 85
4. Teachers School Districts ............................................................................. 86
5. Special School Designations......................................................................... 87
6. School Letter Grades.................................................................................... 88
7. Teacher Grade Level Assignments ............................................................... 89
7/28/2019 ATC Dissertation
9/220
ABSTRACT
Ann Tippetts Christiansen
This research is primarily a phenomenological qualitative study of how art teachers
who were trained in the approach continue to use Discipline-Based Art Education.
The study assessed how the graduates of the formerly-DBAE-focused art education
program at Florida State University currently use that paradigm as the focus of their art
programs. The selected art teachers were interviewed, which was the primary
research strategy for this study. The teachers who were interviewed were selected
from the results of a survey that was the supporting strategy. During the twentieth
century, art teacher preparation changed periodically to meet the challenges inherent
in growth in the field (Day, 1997; Dobbs, 1992). It has been acknowledged that DBAE,or Discipline-Based Art Education, is a theoretical approach rather than a curriculum
(Day, 1991). As a result, the DBAE approach has been revised and redesigned to suit
teachers, resources, and school and classroom circumstances. By the beginning of
the twenty first century discipline-based art education had become ingrained in art
teacher preparation, but since that time, there has been a shift away from DBAE as
the dominant art education paradigm being taught in teacher education programs in
higher education. This is the case even though practicing teachers continue to use it
as the dominant model. With that understanding, it would be of value to know how
that approach is still utilized. Since the FSU Art Education Department revised its
teacher education training program in the early years of the twenty first century, the
Departments approach to teaching art in schools has changed in response to the
context in which students learn art and teachers teach it, to the globalization of
information, to the relative ease with which one can access information about differing
cultures and ideas, as well as to the changing nature of art (Anderson, 2006;
Anderson & Milbrandt, 2005; Stokrocki, 2004). Currently within the North American art
education community, there is no single approach to art education, although the
tenets of DBAE remain foundational with branches growing in different directions as
new notions of what should be included in art curricula emerge.
7/28/2019 ATC Dissertation
10/220
1
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY
In the late 1980s, teacher education in the visual arts, noted Sevigny (1987),
[was] at the threshold of significant opportunity (p. 121), with the advent of discipline-
based art education. That opportunity grew from nineteenth century studio-based art
education, through traditions such as progressivism and child-centered art education, to
the challenges issued by the excellence movements that characterized art education in
the second half of the twentieth century. As the end of the twentieth century
approached, paradigms were shifting toward an approach to art education that
expanded the perception of it to include not only the instruction of studio practices in art
production, but also some knowledge of arts history, a grasp of the principles of
aesthetic judgment, and an understanding of at least a few of the puzzles inherent in
our reflections on art (Smith, 1987b, p vi). Discipline-based art education (DBAE), as it
came to be known, grew from that perceived need and was the driving force in art
education through the end of the twentieth century (Day, 1997; Greer, 1984).
Art teachers who used the DBAE approach required significant training whether
they had taught art or were new to the field. The training came primarily from university
art education programs, but significant opportunities for training also were provided
through institutes of art education under the auspices of university programs and the
Getty Center for Education in the Arts (Getty Center for Education in the Arts, 1993).
The institutes made summer training available to art teachers, classroom teachers, and
school administrators whose presence was required to ensure subsequent
administrative support at each school. With changing times institutions of higher
learning have had to strive to keep pace by offering improvements in teacher education
programs. Day (1997) remonstrated that with change must also come the
determination of colleges and university teacher preparation programs to strengthen
7/28/2019 ATC Dissertation
11/220
2
and improve current art teacher preparation programs, to ensure that all programs are
at least adequate and preferably better (p. 11).
During the twentieth century, art teacher preparation changed periodically to
meet the challenges inherent in growth in the field (Day, 1997; Dobbs, 1992), and now
DBAE is no longer the dominant art teacher education paradigm. The dynamic nature
of the field of art education requires examination of teacher preparation in the context of
the times as well as an investigation into the effectiveness of that preparation to ensure
that the significant opportunity that concerned Sevigny is maximized and enhanced. In
that context, all that is older is not useless. An assumption of this study is that we
shouldnt dispose of the good along with the bad, the baby with the bathwater. So the
question is, what has been good about DBAE? What should we keep?
DBAE is a theoretical approach to teaching and learning rather than a curriculum
(Day, 1991). As a result, the DBAE approach has been revised and redesigned to suit
teachers, resources, as well as school and classroom circumstances. By the beginning
of the twenty-first century, discipline-based art education had become ingrained in art
teacher preparation, but since that time, there has been a shift away from DBAE as the
dominant art education paradigm being taught in teacher education programs in higher
education. This is the case even though practicing teachers continue to use it as a
dominant model. With that understanding, it would be of value to know how that
approach is still utilized. How is DBAE currently used in K-12 schools? What is still
useful about it? How have some of the components of DBAE changed as individual
teachers have had opportunity to use the approach and determine its success in the
classroom?
This research is primarily a phenomenological qualitative study of how art
teachers who were trained in the approach continue to use DBAE. The study assessed
how the graduates of a formerly-DBAE-focused art education program currently use that
paradigm as the focus of their art programs. The selected teachers were interviewed,
which was the primary research strategy for this study. They were selected from the
results of a survey that was the supporting strategy.
Graduates from The Florida State University Art Education program were chosen
for this study as a result of the selection of that program by the Getty Center for
7/28/2019 ATC Dissertation
12/220
3
Education in the Arts as a training venue for prospective art teachers (1988). As a
result of the Snowbird initiative (1988), Florida State University became a primary
institution for training prospective art teachers the DBAE approach. The students who
graduated from FSUs art education program during the period from 1987 through 2003
were trained in fundamental approaches to teach a comprehensive art program
including the four tenets of DBAE, specifically art history, art production, aesthetics, and
art criticism (General Bulletin, 1997).
Since the FSU Art Education Department revised its teacher education training
program in the early years of the twenty first century, the Departments approach to
teaching art in schools had changed in response to the context in which students learn
art and teachers teach it, to the globalization of information, to the relative ease with
which one can access information about differing cultures and ideas, as well as to the
changing nature of art (Anderson, 2006; Anderson & Milbrandt, 2005; Stokrocki, 2004).
Currently within the North American art education community, there is no single
approach to art education, although the tenets of DBAE remain foundational with
branches growing in different directions as new notions of what should be included in art
curricula emerge. Some of the courses at FSU were informed by an expanded version
of content-centered comprehensive art education with seven foci including four tenets of
DBAE (studio production, art criticism, aesthetics, and art history) and three more:
creativity, visual culture, and emerging technologies (Anderson & Milbrandt, 2005).
With recent developments in mind, it can be beneficial to determine the viability of
discipline-based art education, or at least aspects of DBAE, in the minds of art teachers
who were trained in its use and continue to use it or aspects of it.
Once DBAE-trained teachers began to practice their craft, they made choices as
to what to emphasize and what to omit to accommodate each teachers situation. To
determine where art education stands at this time, it is appropriate for the discipline of
art education to step back and evaluate the shelf life of DBAE. Does it continue? Is it
used as it was originally intended? What changes have emerged? Are the changes
occurring with any consistency, or are they differing from teacher to teacher? What are
the implications for art education? The answers to these and similar questions lie, at
least in part, with the practitioners of art education.
7/28/2019 ATC Dissertation
13/220
4
Problem Statement
It was necessary to explore how art teachers have not only put into practice the
approach in which they were trained, but also explore what has influenced the changes
they have made in their art curricula (Day, 1997; Thurber, 2004; Zimmerman, 2004).
This study was designed to determine the opinions of selected art teachers who
participated in and graduated from the FSU program with a bachelors and/or a masters
degree in art education on a teacher certification track during the period when the DBAE
paradigm was taught to determine whether they still practice the DBAE approach, what
aspects of it they find useful, and what aspects they think should be retained in future
teacher preparation.
The study included a contextual examination of trends in art education during the
twentieth century to indicate the place DBAE occupied in that history. With an
understanding of the place DBAE occupied, the question this study examined was
whether the components of DBAE were still viable for future directions in art education
as perceived by selected DBAE-trained art teachers.
The guiding research problem for this project was: Given that it was the
dominant paradigm in art education for twenty years, given that we are currently moving
into other paradigms of art education, particularly Comprehensive Art Education, one
form of which isArt For Life (Anderson & Milbrandt, 2005) and Visual Culture Art
Education (Duncum, 2001; Tavin & Hausman, 2004), and given that there must have
been something valuable in discipline-based art education to make it such a dominant
paradigm for that period, what is it that is still valuable about discipline-based art
education, what would be desirable to retain from DBAE, what were its most successful
aspects, what were its most useful qualities, in the eyes of selected practitioners who
continue to use that paradigm?
Guiding Question
The guiding question for this study was: What aspects of discipline-based art
education do art teachers trained in DBAE find useful and valuable in teaching art, and
what aspects would they recommend retaining in future art teacher training?
7/28/2019 ATC Dissertation
14/220
5
Supporting Questions
Through an extensive literature review of significant literature of teacher
preparation, the following supporting questions emerged that helped frame the
conceptual foundations of this study.
1. What have practitioners trained in the DBAE approach retained and used
consistently? Why is this so?
2. What non-DBAE components have been added to teachers DBAE-framed
programs? Why?
3. What components have been discarded, from the DBAE approach, and why
were they discarded.
4. What aspects of DBAE do practicing DBAE-trained art teachers recommend be
retained in future art teacher training?
Objectives of Study
The objectives of this study were to:
1. Determine the historical context in which discipline-based art education
developed and to gather other information related to the research problem
through a review of literature;
2. Design a survey instrument and survey teachers to find a base of information and
an interview population;
3. Design an interview instrument and interview selected teachers to assess the
uses of DBAE and the attitudes of selected teachers trained in the DBAE
paradigm to DBAE as well as the modifications they have made since they began
using the approach;
4. Describe, analyze, interpret and evaluate the data to determine how the selected
teachers continue to use DBAE or not, what aspects they use, modifications
made, reasons why, and the value they put on given aspects of DBAE as well as
their recommendations for its future use in teacher training programs; and
7/28/2019 ATC Dissertation
15/220
6
5. Draw conclusions regarding the DBAE paradigm and its current use in selected
schools based on the supporting data and suggest possible uses of aspects of
DBAE in future art teacher training.
Personal Motivation for This Study
There was personal reason for me to follow this particular line of research. As an
art teacher in a middle school, I was concerned with the preparation I received as a
certification track undergraduate. As a 1972 graduate with a major in art from another
university, I was not as prepared to teach art as I was prepared to make art. With the
completion of a Master of Science degree in art education in 1992 from FSU, which at
the time was using the DBAE paradigm, I felt prepared to teach the subject and to
inspire my students. As a teacher who found satisfaction in using components of
DBAE, I was curious about the other practicing art teachers who came through this
program. Were they as satisfied as I was with DBAE as the foundation of their art
curricula? What have they changed since they implemented the DBAE model? I felt it
was important to research the teaching and learning strategies of other graduates of the
program in which I received that focused training in DBAE to see if others currently
practice DBAE and why. In short, I felt that there were valuable aspects of DBAE, and I
wanted to see if others did, too, and why.
Rationale for the Study
Discipline-based art education has been a useful paradigm. As a practitioner of
the approach, I was in a position to know this first hand, so I was curious as to the
opinion of others who were prepared to teach using DBAE of the efficacy of that
approach. During the decade that FSU primarily trained art teachers in the DBAE
approach, that paradigm was a tool to reform teachers who had been practicing earlier
methods as well as to prepare new teachers (Day, 2000). This study sought to
determine what aspects of DBAE remained useful and what was advised to be retained
by practicing teachers for future teacher training. The current viability and projections
for future directions were based on responses from teachers who, first, were trained in
the DBAE approach, and, second, have taught using that approach and adapted the
7/28/2019 ATC Dissertation
16/220
7
approach to fit the needs of their students and schools. With the results from the
interviews, recommendations are made as to what could be fostered from the original
DBAE approach, and, conversely, what should be discarded as no longer useful.
Justification of the Study
The last half of the twentieth century was marked by the cry for improvements in
the nations schools (Barkan, 1960; Bigge & Shermis, 1991; Brown, 1991; Bybee, 1998;
Clowse, 1981; Efland, 1990b; Eisner, 1972; McFee, 1965; Rhoades, 1985; Rippa,
1992). Critics claimed that the American educational system was not doing its job. The
movement toward higher academic standards dominated the debate over the direction
of American education with an emphasis on math and science, curtailing the influence
of Progressive Education (Bruner, 1960, 1962; Barkan, 1960). When the Soviet Union
launched Sputnik, criticism of the American educational system escalated (Efland,
1990; Rippa, 1992). Congress passed the National Defense Education Act in 1958. Art
educators responded to the movement but with differing approaches.
DBAE was accepted by many as the definitive approach to art education that
would include art production but also art history, art criticism, and aesthetics as means
to mold art education into a viable discipline that could place it on a level comparable
with math or science in the school curricula (Greer, 1984).
Day (1997) noted that for significant progress to be made in the implementation
of any new approach, it was vital that art teachers be included in the research and
improvement process. It is appropriate and needed now, as it was then, to allow art
teachers who participated in the art education program at the Florida State University to
provide the data for assessing the success of the approach taught at that time
(Anderson, 2000; Hutchens, 1997). With the feedback from the teachers trained in the
DBAE approach to art education, a more accurate measure of the value of the approach
is possible. The practitioners who have put the approach in place are in an excellent
position to assess its practical merits.
7/28/2019 ATC Dissertation
17/220
8
Scope and Limitations of the Study
Primarily, this phenomenological qualitative study has the potential to inform the
art education community about the practical value of DBAE, or aspects of DBAE, as
seen through responses of the selected teachers who were trained in the paradigm and
teach using that paradigm. I interviewed selected art teachers to obtain their responses
to queries about the success of DBAE in their art programs and about where their
programs have diverged from the DBAE approach. The study is limited in that the
survey participants consisted of 11 teachers, and there were three teachers who were
interviewed so the results are not generalizable. More teachers would increase the
generalizability of the results, but the focus on the three teachers, instead, provided an
in-depth look at their perspectives from a phenomenological perspective (Bogdan &
Biklen, 1982).
Overview of the Procedures and Methodology
This is a phenomenological qualitative study (Krathwohl, 1993; Charles &
Mertler, 2002). The selection of art teachers to be interviewed was made from those
who graduated from The Florida State University with bachelors and/or masters
degrees in art education between 1990 and 2000, who were currently teaching art in the
state of Florida. The interview participants were selected from a population responding
to the earlier survey about DBAE conducted by the researcher. This study evaluates
those in the field as to their perception of the DBAE approach to art education, its
current viability, aspects of the paradigm that are more or less useful to them, and their
ideas about future directions for emergent art education paradigms.
DBAE is an approach to art education that evolved in response to conditions in
the world and the United States of America as they impacted the course of education.
In order to place the program at FSU in the context of its time in art education, I
conducted a literature review of the history of art education and art teacher training
practices couched in the context of notable events during the twentieth century. Since
education is impacted by events in history, it was critical that trends in education and
teacher training be examined in the historic setting that gave impetus to change. By
extension, it was equally critical that art education and art teacher preparation also be
7/28/2019 ATC Dissertation
18/220
9
analyzed as it was framed by general trends in education. The first portion of the
literature review laid the foundation for the inception of DBAE. Included was the
development of the plan by researchers accompanied by art teachers for the transition
from teaching using the predecessors of DBAE to its use as the basis for art education
in Americas schools. The DBAE paradigm was delineated, including descriptions of the
positions of its advocates as well as those of its detractors.
In 2005 an inquiry was conducted of 28 of the teachers who graduated from the
FSU Art Education program during the DBAE period to set foundational information
about potential participants and their perceptions of their DBAE-centered art education.
From the eleven respondents to this survey, three participants were selected who were
interviewed. The selection of the interviewees was based on demographic data and
appropriateness of the potential interviewees to the purpose of this study. This is called
purposeful sampling (Bogdan & Biklen, 1982; Seidman, 1998; Schultz, Chambless, &
Decuir, 2004).
I am the researcher for this study, and am responsible for the creation of the
questions used in the interviews of the art teachers, the search for the art teachers
where they now reside and are now employed, and for contacts with the art teachers
with a request for assistance in this study through participating in the interview process
(Eisner, 1991; Seidman, 1998). I am also the person who completed the descriptions,
analyses and interpretations of the interview transcriptions. Thus, judgment of the value
of DBAE as well as its current status is based on the data collected through the
interviews and my analysis of them. As a middle school art teacher in Florida, I, too,
impact this study as I brought my own experience to the study simply as a result of the
impossibility of absolute objectivity due to my involvement in art education. As much as
possible, as the researcher, I reported the responses as they were recorded and
summarized the data without distortion, but my influence is reflected, and I acknowledge
that (Bogdan & Biklen, 1982).
Definition of Terms
These terms are framed from a DBAE point of view as articulated by scholars
engaged in that theory and practice.
7/28/2019 ATC Dissertation
19/220
10
Aesthetics: This is an area of philosophy that deals with the perception of the beautiful
and the value of art. Aesthetics is that branch of philosophy that endeavors to
understand our experience and perceptions of art (Crawford, 1987).
Art criticism: This involves judgments about art based on standards supported by good
reason. Art criticism seeks to inform and educate peopleabout art by providing
insights into its meaning so as to increase the understanding and appreciation of art and
to illuminate the cultural ands societal values reflected in it (Risatti, 1987, p. 219).
Art education: Art education is the instruction of visual art as a subject in school using a
set approach designed to meet set criteria of knowledge and accomplishment. Art is
taught as a subject in school curricula with specific content, objectives, and practices
(Smith, 1987a).
Art history: Art history is the examination of art in the context of the times in which it
was created and with reference to the artist or culture that made it. It is an area of
knowledge concerning examining works of art to the end that they become meaningful
in the scheme of history through writing and discussion (Kleinbauer, 1987).
Art production: Art production is the creation of art. In art production that is within a
DBAE approach, students learn to join imagination to a sensitivity for materials, tools,
and processes, and technique becomes an accomplishment that contributes significant
quality to their work (Spratt, 1987, p. 202).
Creative Self-Expression: Creative self-expression is art is the act of making forms that
[bear] human meaning. This is an intentional, purposeful act of making meaning
through the use and manipulation of aesthetic tools such as composition, technique,
and concepts. It may be judged by the appropriateness of the means in relation to the
perceived expression in a social context (Anderson & Milbrandt, 2005, p. 235).
Discipline-based art education: DBAE is an approach to teaching art that incorporates
the study of art history, aesthetics, art criticism and art production in the student
experience with the goal of developing students abilities to understand and appreciate
art. This involves a knowledge of the theories and contexts of art and abilities to
respond to as well as to create art. Art is taught as an essential component of general
education and as a foundation for specialized art study (Clark, Day, & Greer, 1987, p.
135).
7/28/2019 ATC Dissertation
20/220
11
Interview: A meeting during which someone is asked questions, for example, by a
journalist or a researcher. It is a purposeful conversation, usually between two people
(but sometimes involving more) that is directed by one in order to get information
(Bogdan &Biklen, 1982, p. 135).
Paradigm: An example that serves as a pattern or model for something, especially one
that forms the basis of a methodology or theory, is a paradigm. Paradigms are noted
for being loose collection[s] of logically-held together assumptions, concepts, or
propositions that orient thinking and research (Bogdan & Biklen, 1981, p. 30).
Phenomenology: The study of things as they are perceived as opposed to the study of
the nature of things is phenomenology. This is subjective and requires researchers to
attempt to gain access to their subjects understanding of the world, for it is that
understanding that constructs reality for the subjects (Bogdan & Biklen, 1982).
Summary
This study is designed to determine through empirical evidence the perceptions
and opinions of the art teachers who participated in and graduated from the FSU DBAE-
based program for teacher education between the years 1990 and 2000 with a
bachelors and/or a masters degree in art education on a teacher certification track to
determine how the DBAE approach has served their goals for teaching art. Through a
literature review the program familiarly known as DBAE is placed in its historical context
and delineated in terms of the reasons for its content, development, and
implementation. The preliminary survey set the stage, provided the means for selecting
participants, and provided initial information about their responses to DBAE as a
paradigm. The interviews serve to provide further demographic detail about individual
teaching situations, but the primary purpose of that activity is to allow art teachers who
were prepared to teach art by means of using the DBAE paradigm to evaluate the value
of that approach. With the growing concern for educational reform, art educators in
higher education are determined that the preparation of art teachers be addressed in
terms of the directions the subject may take (Day, 1997; Efland, 1990a; Smith, 1987;
Spring, 2004).
This study seeks to add insight and information to accomplish that task.
7/28/2019 ATC Dissertation
21/220
12
CHAPTER TWO
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
Discipline-based art education was the dominant paradigm in art education
toward the end of the twentieth century (Clark, 1997; Day, 1997a; Day, 1997b;
Stankiewicz, 2000; Wilson, 1996.) Prior to the advent of discipline-based art education,
its antecedents characterized the swinging pendulum of change. Depending on the
events in local, national, or global communities, approaches to art education have
responded to the prevailing attitudes of the day.
When the arc of a pendulum reaches its most extreme in either direction, it
begins to swing back, but it retains the energy of the previous stroke (Anderson &
Milbrandt, 2005; Bell, 2005; Kuhn, 1970; Mittler & Ragans, 1999). Art education is at
the apex of a new change, or a paradigm shift, as practitioners of discipline-based art
education review the past decades and opt for new paradigms. The question, here, is
what is valuable about DBAE? What should be retained in the eyes of practitioners?
This literature review, initially, then, must focus on what DBAE is and what its qualities
are.
In order to determine the place DBAE occupies in history and the reasons for its
inception, the patterns established by previous changes in art education policy need
appropriate, but brief, examination. Mary Erickson (1979) noted that one reason to
study histories of art education would be to create dialogue and ask questions about
current and future directions in art education. The first portion of the literature review,
therefore, is an examination of art education in the last half of the twentieth century
leading to the perceived need for a discipline-based approach to art education. This
examination contributes to an understanding of what was realized in the years just priorto the adoption of a new model in art education as the end of the twentieth century
approached (Sevigny, 1987). A study of DBAE within frameworks of "social values,
cultural reproduction, economic production, and political issues" (Stankiewicz, 1992,
p. 172) of the times is essential to an understanding of the implementation of the
approach.
7/28/2019 ATC Dissertation
22/220
13
Throughout the nineteenth and twentieth centuries there were three dominant
movements in art education (Efland, 1990a). The expressionist, reconstructionist and
scientific movements, in turn, dominated or contributed to change and growth in
education and art education. Placing a new approach to art education in the context of
national movements and the responses of general education to those movements
enables the impetus for change to become more apparent. Additionally, providing
context for the implementation of DBAE allows researchers to measure the effects of
that approach more effectively as art education moves to new paradigms.
Although an examination of DBAE in isolation offers the opportunity to dissect it
and study the elements that made it successful, it is advantageous to first examine the
approach in the context of that time, thus giving the researcher the advantage of
knowing the foundations that led to its development and implementation (Seidman,
1998; Sevigny, 1987). Armed with this understanding, conclusions can be drawn as to
the effectiveness of DBAE in achieving the goals as well as to the perception by its
practitioners of what direction they take when given a need or opportunity for change in
approaches. The inclusion of this portion of the literature review assists in setting the
stage for DBAE, in the determination of what made DBAE significant in art education
history, in the measure of its success, and some of the reasons for diverging from the
path established by the advocates and practitioners of that approach.
Part two of the review of literature focuses on discipline-based art education as
presented to the art education community by those who prepared the approach for use
in the classroom. With the context of trends in education, teacher education and art
education established, an examination of that approach is detailed. Section two of the
literature review also introduces noted trends in art education that have come about
since DBAE.
7/28/2019 ATC Dissertation
23/220
14
Part One: A Brief History
Approaching the Twentieth Century
As the twentieth century opened it was apparent that the societal goals of thenineteenth century, to educate future citizens, reduce crime, and provide equality of
opportunity, (Spring, 2004, p. 8) had not changed. Although the church was the
organization most likely to promote these goals in past centuries, by the twentieth
century the school had become the institution on which pressure was placed to sort out
societal problems (Spring, 2004). According to Bigge and Shermis (1992), there were
two dominant learning theories in education of the twentieth century through which
these goals were met. The behaviorists determined that the stimulus-response
approach, or educating children through conditioning, would reap the best results. On
the other hand, learning through the interaction of children with their environment to
gain an understanding of new information was the appropriate approach for the
cognitive interactionist group. The two models are alternately woven in the fabric of
twentieth century education. They moved art education toward the abandonment of the
creative expressionist model and toward the implementation of a discipline-based
model.
Behaviorism
With the publication of works by Charles Darwin, new approaches to education
were filtered through the lens of social Darwinism, through the stimulus-response lens
of the behaviorists, and rejected notions of compassion and social responsibility in favor
of survival of the fittest (Callahan, 1963; Efland, 1990a; Gardner, 1991; Rippa, 1992).
Business became a player in this process when profits appeared to hinge increasingly
on the desire and ability of immigrant children to adapt to the American dream of
economic independence. Unless vocational training to prepare children for factory work
was provided, business considered schools to be a poor investment of tax dollars.
School administration was viewed as managing the business of education, as social
efficiency increasingly influenced decisions in education.
7/28/2019 ATC Dissertation
24/220
15
In balancing the three goals of academic instruction, assistance to immigrant
families, and vocational training, educators struggled to serve the interests of business
groups, reformers, politicians, religious organizations, and welfare associations, among
other groups, all demanding that schools teach in a manner that would serve those
interests (Amburgy, 1990; Cremin, 1961; Efland, 1990a; Rippa, 1992; Spring, 2004).
The increasing interest in solving social problems brought the philosophy of
progressivism to the forefront. Progressivism promoted action in making social change.
The means of making social change came through education. Eventually the efficiency
of teachers came into question and was measured by student intelligence tests and
productivity aspects of curricula.
Progressivism
The progressive education movement commonly associated with John Dewey,
brought teachers to a greater awareness of the humanity of children and a renewed
focus on personal relations between students and between students and teachers
(Sellers & May, 1963; Efland, 1990a; Hurwitz, 1990; Smithsonian Center for Education
and Museum Studies, 2003; Spring, 2004). Dewey, as a cognitive interactionist,
believed that children could learn intellectually as they interacted in a life-like setting,
where learning was a byproduct of social interaction in a classroom community. The
progressive education movement was attacked for pampering children at the expense
of academic performance, but the approach assisted many who worked for rational,
democratic solutions to social challenges of the twentieth century. Dewey determined
that the interests of the child and social interaction were the two key sources of child
learning.
Reconstructionism
The reconstructionist mode of thinking believed in the transformational qualitiesof education (Amburgy, 1990 & 2002; Efland, 1990a; Siegesmund, 1998). In this vein,
manual training proponents persuaded educators that along with preparing students for
vocations, the approach was inherently beneficial from a mental discipline perspective.
Good craftsmanship and the notion that a well-functioning article could also be made
7/28/2019 ATC Dissertation
25/220
16
paralleled goals of art education. Eventually vocational education, with its emphasis on
the arts-and-crafts movement, and art education began to diverge, with art teachers
retaining a focus on teaching art appreciation. This direction removed art education
from a utilitarian status and relegated it to the position of an elective course.
Social Efficiency
Social efficiency sought to measure student intelligence, teacher efficiency, and
curricula effectiveness as the beginnings of the scientific rationalist thread (Efland,
1990a; Rippa, 1992). Since art instruction was not determined to be essential for the
survival of civilization, it was to have a place in life, but was not as important as other
school subjects.
Between World Wars
Progressivism produced some reform in better schools, improvements in city
slums and working conditions in factories (Efland, 1990a; Rippa, 1992). Winning the
right to vote in 1920, women entered the workforce in increasing numbers, and changed
the traditional family pattern of father as breadwinner and mother as nurturer of children
and home. In the 1920s Victorian attitudes were challenged, liberating society from
puritanical repression. The decade was marked by optimism spread following the
victory in World War I. The 1929 stock market crash ended that outlook, plunging the
country into the Great Depression. The 1930s saw a retrenchment of society in solving
problems facing so many during the Depression.
Education
Before World War I, scientific methods of administration, changes in curriculum,
and educational testing, were used to improve social efficiency (Efland, 1990a).
Notions of improving social conditions, and, by extension, the conditions of the country,were woven into the fabric of education.
Progressivism versus Behaviorism. Progressivism relied on the principle that
learning, and thus teaching, must be founded on childrens natural development, life
experiences and community life in a cognitive interactionist vein (Dewey, 1915/1953;
7/28/2019 ATC Dissertation
26/220
17
Sellers & May, 1963; Bigge & Shermis, 1992; Efland, 1990a; Efland, 1990b, Gardner,
1991). However, with Americas involvement in World War I, Progressive education
reforms were postponed. World War I revealed shortcomings in American schools
when a high number of those inducted into the military earned very low scores on the
army Alpha tests. Following the War, school reform was increasingly based on
behaviorist scientific research, as part of the scientific movement, in the form of
standardized testing. The tests were also useful as schools began tracking students
according to ability and aptitude.
In reaction to the rigidity of the scientific movement, the expressionist movement
was funded by the idea that the child in people was crushed by rigid teaching methods
and expectations (Bigge & Shermis, 1992; Efland, 1990a; Efland, 1990b; Hurwitz,
1990). The innate need to create and express oneself was considered vital to the
development of children. Creative self-expressionism grew with the interest in Freuds
writings about the unconscious. Educators used his ideas to direct the learning of
socially acceptable behaviors through creative expression. The child-centered school
emerged as a model for children to escape the rigid strictures of industrialized society,
allowing children to grow and flower through individual creative expression rather than
through groups or community interaction. Noting that John Deweys progressivist
efforts were funded by the desire for educational reform by guiding children through
learning experiences in a school community setting, another group of reformers, known
as reconstructionists, attempted to remake Deweys early progressive positions with
less focus on the childs choices and more emphasis on providing appropriate curricula
to guiding children (Efland, 1990a; Eisner, 1985).
Opposing sides faced the problems of enhancing educational opportunity and its
maximization (Bigge & Shermis, 1992; Efland, 1990a; Hurwitz, 1990; Spring, 2004). On
one side were those who based school reform on scientific research based on
behaviorist notions of stimulus-response attempting to measure a childs educational
growth and to quantify what aided in the process. On the other side were child-centered
schools enabling students in their progress toward self-fulfillment. Overlapping the two
were variants of Progressivism using researched methods designed to enhance the
childs opportunity to learn school subjects in a community setting.
7/28/2019 ATC Dissertation
27/220
18
Teacher Education
Normal Schools. Normal schools provided prospective teachers with
opportunities for learning, but the majority of universities had classical curricula and was
critical of normal schools (Dewey, 1965; Harper, 1970). With progressives and
reconstructionists placing the child at the core of their approaches, there was a belief in
academia that normal schools were schools of methods rather than scholarship.
Standardized Teacher Training. By the turn of the century many normal schools
had expanded into four-year degree-granting teachers colleges and by the 1920s and
30s, teachers colleges, generally supported by the public, were training substantial
numbers of the nations public-school teachers (Elsbree, 1939; Clifford & Guthrie, 1990;
Spring, 2004). In at least twenty states, state normal schools required four years of high
school work for admission, and private normal schools were also tending to establish
such a requirement. By 1933, forty-two states required licensing at the state level, and
the requirement was primarily the completion of teacher education courses. Since that
time, the pattern to certify on the state level and base that certification on teacher
education courses has continued. Many normal schools have become university
departments of education. In the 1930s the American Council on Education
established a National Teachers Examination that tested the subject matter taught.
Schools of education attacked the examination.
The National Education Association can claim responsibility for much of the
systematic standardization of the training of teachers (Ravitch, 2004; Wesley, 1957).
The Associations Normal Department had surveyed teacher education institutions since
the nineteenth century and was involved in addressing perceived needs. Eventually
teacher education became identified with the completion of a teacher education
program instead of passing subject matter exams.
Art Education
Child-Centered Art. During the period between the two World Wars art education
took its direction from dominant movements of the time (Efland, 1990a; Korzenik, 1990).
Devotees of Franz Cizek, an Austrian who promoted a concept that became known as
child-centered art, insisted on avoiding adult influence in teaching art to children and
7/28/2019 ATC Dissertation
28/220
19
allowing much greater freedom for children to make art in their own way. From those
who practiced Cizeks approach, he acquired the reputation as the father of free-
expression. Creative self-expressionism evolved as a method in which children made
their own art as a means of expressing themselves without adult intervention. It was
determined that teaching this method was best left in the hands of artists, as they were
singularly equipped to be sensitive enough to measure the expression in child art.
The trend from the expressionist focus on the individual childs artistic expression
to a societal view of art education came in the wake of economic pressure of the Great
Depression (Efland, 1983; Efland, 1990a). Greater emphasis on art as a part of life and
less on art in isolation as personal expression grew under the influence of John
Deweys approach that put art as part of daily experience. In the same manner that
connected art to religious worship, had it depicted war and peace, and used it to
enhanced industrial design, reconstructionists integrated it into education.
During the Depression art education was not eliminated from most school
districts in spite of cost-cutting measures, but it was reduced in some, with some
entertaining the goal of implementing or expanding an art program retrenched in
response to the dire financial straits in which the country and much of the world found
itself (Efland, 1990a). To retain support for art education it was necessary to refocus
the goal of art curricula from the nature of art and beauty to art as contributing to
solutions for societies problems.
Reconstructionists integrated art into such subjects as language arts, history,
science, and math (Efland, 1990a). Art education was a tool to dissolve boundaries
between subjects and provide a unified educational experience for children and
adolescents. Art was often paired with social studies, and followed trends of the time.
The art deco style of drawing, in favor in architecture and other areas of design,
replaced drawings in the style of the arts-and-crafts movement of the turn of the
century.
Levels of Art Education. Art supervisors were present in school districts in large
cities to supervise elementary art taught by classroom teachers (Efland, 1983).
Elementary art teachers were rare in the period between the World Wars, since it was
financially sound, instead, to maintain an art supervisor in a district to work with
7/28/2019 ATC Dissertation
29/220
20
classroom teachers and their endeavors in art instruction. In secondary education the
curriculum was organized into separate subjects by classes. The number of art teachers
increased for that reason. Unlike previous generations in which many students dropped
out of school to enter the workforce in factories, most students remained in high school
until they graduated due to the lack of jobs during the Great Depression.
From World War II to the Demand for Excellence
With the Holocaust perpetrated by the Third Reich and the dropping of atomic
bombs, the landscape of Americas future had changed (Efland, 1990a). The
magnitude of atrocities had grown globally. Opportunities for a piece of the American
Dream increased at home following World War II. With the return of soldiers to their
homes in America, birthrates skyrocketed. This phenomenon was called the Baby
Boom, and it continued into the 1970s. Postwar prosperity also continued into the
1970s. Families moved into the suburbs and contributed to the effects of the Baby
Boom, the subsequent children of Baby Boomers.
By the end of the World War II one third of the women were in the labor force, but
many left employment after they were married (Rippa, 1992). Women became a strong
political voice as more entered the work force and/or represented their families
interests.
Before the war the pattern of separate-but-equal schools followed an 1896
Supreme Court ruling that sanctioned separate but equal facilities and services for
African Americans (Rippa, 1992). This provided the basis for schools systems providing
separate but equal schools, but by erasing segregation in the armed forces, the war
expanded the outlook of African Americans on race relations. As soldiers returned
home many moved north instead of returning to the south, contributing to an increasing
population shift of African Americans into such northern cities as Chicago, Detroit, and
New York City. On May 17, 1954, the Supreme Court reversed the 1896 decision and
was followed with a ruling on May 31, 1955 in which it was determined that
desegregation must proceed quickly. The sudden end to segregation did not occur, and
a civil rights crusade to influence government policy and public attitudes reached a
7/28/2019 ATC Dissertation
30/220
21
climax with the passage of the Civil Rights Act in 1964. It enforced the right to vote and
the prevention of discrimination based on race.
Following World War II, the United States and the Union of the Soviet Socialist
Republics, or USSR, became the dominant world leaders, engaging in tension and
conflict through third-party countries. Espousing communism since early in the
twentieth century, the Soviet Union was seen by the United States as a threat to peace
and to independent nations unwilling to bow to Soviet pressure to follow their
communist lead. This era was known as the Cold War (Andressen, Berry & van Hoesel,
2003; Garber, 2003). Americans who were concerned about the threat of communism
to democracy labeled those who exhibited liberal political leanings as communists, and
waged campaigns against the threat of communism on American soil. When the Soviet
Union launched Sputnik, the first artificial satellite, the space age was sparked, and with
the space race the beginning of the Cold War between the United States and the Soviet
Union was ignited (Sellers & May, 1963).
With advances in communications and electronics, Americans had increasing
access to events as they unfolded (Andressen, Berry & van Hoesel, 2003). Television
brought civil rights developments, the days following the assassination of President
Kennedy, and the Vietnam conflict and its atrocities into the homes of Americans. One
result was a heightened sensitivity to, or tension with, social and political problems and
their proponents or detractors.
Education
Progressivism Under Attack. John Deweys ideas, the life adjustment approach
to education, as well as other notions of progressive education, came under further
attack after World War II. Critics wanted a return to an emphasis on basic academic
curricula (Brown, 1991; Bybee, 1998; Bigge & Shermis, 1991; Clowse, 1981; Efland,
1990b; Rippa, 1992). This assumption was based on the notion that education in the
recent and distant past was more efficacious than the current means. When the Soviet
Union launched Sputnik, criticism of the American educational system escalated. Were
Soviet students better educated? Had their system of education prepared better
scientists and mathematicians? Critics claimed that the American educational system
7/28/2019 ATC Dissertation
31/220
22
was not doing its job. The debate over the direction of American education ended in
favor of the movement toward higher academic standards with an emphasis on math
and science, curtailing the influence of progressive education (Efland, 1990; Rippa,
1992). Congress passed the National Defense Education Act in 1958. The Act was
designed to support educational efforts toward producing future scientists to advance
the American position in a space race. It was in this context that the historic Woods
Hole Conference was held.
Education Reform. The Woods Hole Conference of 1959 influenced a reform
movement of discipline-centered education (Bruner, 1960); Clowse, 1981; Rippa, 1992).
According to participant, Jerome Bruner, the thrust of curriculum problems was that
subjects taught in schools, in many cases, were not to be found outside of the school.
Conversely, students and professionals alike, in a need to further knowledge and
understanding, pursued disciplines. Reformers designed curricula based on
mathematical problem solving and scientific research. Students learned science and
mathematics as disciplines and more challenging requirements were implemented.
New instructional media, such as filmstrips and 8- and 16- milometer films, were funded
by government and were integral to most new approaches in an effort to catch up with
Soviet education. This symbolized a growing involvement of federal government in
education. This is discussed further in a later section of the literature review.
At the same time that education reform was spurred to improvement by scientific
developments with political and financial ramifications, social concerns also surfaced
(Brown, 1991; Rippa, 1992; Spring, 2004). The concept of separate-but-equal
educational opportunities for blacks was challenged, and members of the Supreme
Court determined that separate facilities for blacks did not guarantee that the
opportunity was equal according to the Constitution. Nationwide integration of schools
began. Although it took place quietly in most of the country, areas in which there were
confrontations or public demonstrations in support or in defiance of the ruling confirmed
that public opinion was divided on the issue.
Social and political problems in the 1960s and early 1970s stimulated
movement toward the notion that education should address the diversified clientele that
it served (Brown, 1991; Efland, 1990b; Rippa, 1992; Spring, 2004). Coupling this
7/28/2019 ATC Dissertation
32/220
23
mandate with the drive for greater emphasis on math and science curricula jarred the
nations school districts from the complacency characterizing the mid-century. These
improvements gave impetus to universities and school boards to reform education and
ensure that it served the needs of the populations it served while setting standards high
enough to challenge students in need of that approach.
Child-Centered Schools. In the 1970s there was countermovement to the focus
on math and science (Efland, 1990a). Alternative schools were developed to protest
the strictures imposed by public school systems guided by the momentum created with
Sputniks launching. The new schools were child-centered in the mode of progressive
education, but did not have a driving philosophy. They were primarily formed as a
reaction to the increasing academic focus rather than as a means of implementing an
approach funded by new ideas for education.
Excellence in Education. In 1983, under the direction of David Gardner, the
National Committee on Excellence in Education presented the results of a study in
which it was determined that the state of education in America was immersed in a
rising tide of mediocrity (National Commission on Excellence in Education, 1983;
Zeller, 1984); Rippa, 1992, p. 285). The report,A Nation at Risk, refocused attention on
reform initiatives structured to raise the quality of education. However urgent the need
appeared, the approaches considered were similar to methods imposed on educators
during previous efforts: a longer school year, higher teacher salaries, greater emphasis
on core academic subjects, and the need for more time spent by students on
homework.
The effort in the 1980s was also similar to previous reforms in that it was a top
down approach; decisions about content and methods designed to improve
performance were made by those in positions of authority or who studied results of
committees such as that of David Gardner, and made recommendations (National
Commission on Excellence in Education, 1983). Authorities on educational practices
were determining practice without involving those who would implement the approach.
Without the involvement of teachers in the process of curriculum reform and design, the
opportunity for equal access to education diminished as did the quality of the
implementation of the approach.
7/28/2019 ATC Dissertation
33/220
24
Teacher Education
Following World War II there were growing numbers of students as a product of
the Baby Boom (Anderson, 2000; Ravitch, 2004; Rippa, 1992). Additionally, students
stayed in school longer. These two trends led to a demand for secondary education
that traditional college teacher preparation programs were pressed to meet. Many
teachers were hired without proper credentials or background in a subject area, and
interest was lost in subject area testing. Since that time the majority of teachers
colleges have expanded their missions and become liberal-arts colleges offering a
broad general education in addition to specialized courses in pedagogy. In addition to
preparing prospective teachers to immerse their students in subject area content,
universities routinely require preservice teachers to spend time in schools observing the
environment and populations found there.
Art Education and Art Teacher Training. With the end of World War II there was
a dearth of art teachers (Efland, 1990a). Often programs for elementary teachers
included a course in teaching art. Graduate programs at universities offered masters
degrees in art education through art or education departments and prepared one to
serve as an art supervisor in a school district. A growing interest in research on the
university level influenced change from the number of Ed.D graduate degrees
completed, with a focus on education, to an increasing number of PhD degrees
awarded, with a greater emphasis on research.
During and after World War II, art was perceived by some as a tool for the
defense and promotion of freedom and democracy (Rhoades, 1985). Many art
educators retrenched and promoted a degree of nationalism through directing the
making of patriotic posters defending the war effort. Art also became one of the means
of promoting peace through the global exchange of childrens art works.
Child-Centered Art Education. At the same time schools were criticized for the
progressives child-centered approach and the lack of rigorous academic coursework,
creative self-expression was the driving force for art education (Dobbs, 1992; Efland,
1990a; Horwitz, 1990; Korzenik, 1990; Lowenfeld, 1950; Lowenfeld, 1958; Siegesmund,
1998; Hoffa, 1984; White, 2004). The notions of progressive education persisted in art
7/28/2019 ATC Dissertation
34/220
25
education through such textbooks as Creative and Mental Growth by child-centered art
advocate Viktor Lowenfeld (1950). The application of the arts to daily life became the
means of injecting art appreciation into children. It was determined to be a
developmental activity rather than a subject to study. With this approach, teachers who
had minimal knowledge of the subject of art could teach through motivating children to
express themselves. The psychological importance of art funded much of this
movement promoting art as a tool in the curriculum for shaping young personalities.
Lowenfelds art education encouraged self-expression as a means toward personal
growth. Rather than look at the art children made, Lowenfeld focused on the
psychologically therapeutic production process of children in various developmental
stages. Adult intervention in a childs drawing was frowned upon, since the drawing
was more a measure of what the child might be feeling or was a record of the childs
development.
Advocates of creative expressionism argued that art was vital to a childs
education because creative problem solving skills developed more rapidly with the
advantage of exposure to art instruction in school (Efland, 1990a). Lowenfeld was of
the mind that art was a useful tool for developing creativity. He subscribed to the notion
that the creativity developed within art instruction was transferable to other domains.
There were art educators who challenged Lowenfelds approach (Barkan, 1955;
Eisner, 1972; McFee, 1961). Manuel Barkan saw self-expression as a tool through
which children learn to interact with others. June King McFee challenged Lowenfelds
developmental stages of expression, suggesting that so many human variables could
not be accounted for in so few stages. Elliot Eisner (1972) determined that children
should not be taught art simply as a means of self-expression. Eisner included
instructional resources to encourage the inclusion of content in art education. Thus art
educators were divided between creative expressionism and art taught as a subject
worthy of study.
The launching of the Russian satellite, Sputnik, made arts position in school
instruction more precarious. In the midst of the movement to promote more rigorous
math and science standards, arts position in the schools had to be defended
(Lowenfeld, 1958). Some of the art education community countered that art enhances
7/28/2019 ATC Dissertation
35/220
26
creative solutions to problems in the Lowenfeld vein, while others supported the
curriculum reform movement and encouraged content-based instruction. Lanier (1977)
was critical of the apparent lack of direction in art education, observing that creativity
was the most justifiable rationale for studio-based art curriculum, and he commented on
the number of approaches to art education and the resulting lack of unanimity in the
field.
Content-Based Art Education. The Woods Hole Conference of 1959 influenced
Jerome Bruner (1960) whose writings began to influence art education. Barkan (1960)
noted that Bruners position was to lead students to an understanding of the structure of
a subject, giving the subjects context. Applied to art education, he explained that for art
to have merit in the current climate, it must be addressed as a subject with content that
is important to teach.
The education reports of 1983, examining the status or success of the education
system in America, concluded that education needed to examine what was taught in the
schools and to justify its approaches or change them (Clark, 1984b; Dorn, 1984;
National Commission on Excellence in Education, 1983). Clark noted that instead of
approaching the mediocrity he felt that creative self-expressionism fostered, it would
simply require that art teachers mobilize against art activity that encouraged production
of substandard student art. Zeller (1984) wrote in response to the publication ofA
Nation at Riskthat, not only was it a call for higher standards for U.S. education, it was
a mandate for change in art education and encouraged art educators to take the
offensive in assuring that children have the opportunity to be engaged participants in the
nations cultural heritage and its cultural offerings. Art teacher preparation was found
lacking when art student performance was examined. Zimmerman (1984) commented
that it was vital that art teachers prepared to teach art in a manner that encouraged
excellence in knowledge about art. Implementing change in approaches to art
education would require that art be taught as a content area subject coupled with art as
a performance area.
Creative expressionist art education, with a studio emphasis, in the footsteps of
Lowenfeld (1950), maintained a following, but the challenges facing the nations schools
were reflected in concerns raised by McFee who sought to address concerns for access
7/28/2019 ATC Dissertation
36/220
27
to art education for urban students with fewer economic and social advantages (Bruner,
1962; Dobbs, 1992; Eisner, 1965a; Hurwitz, 1990; McFee, 1965). Elliot Eisner
expressed concerns regarding art curricula, testing in art and the current lack of content
in art appreciation. In the climate of school subjects filtering through the lens academic
disciplines, Bruner commented that knowledge such as that in science could be found in
other subjects such as humanities or social studies. Cognitive growth proponents
determined that art education could make significant contributions to the notion that,
although children were not considered to be reaching their full potential, with a wide
variety of visual experiences and activities, mental functioning could be enhanced.
While curriculum was developing in the science arena, the idea that approaching
art as a discipline had merit not only in terms of teaching students about art but, more
importantly, the concept would also serve to strengthen the curricular position of art
education (Barkan, 1966; Clark & Zimmerman, 1978). As science education received
the attention that was necessary to bring it into the format of a discipline, other subject
areas in the school class schedule were shuffled around or eliminated. Art education
had been on the fringe of consideration with the withdrawal of public support for creative
expressionism as reflected in the progressive approach. Leaders in art education
began to measure the need to provide the subject as a mode of inquiry parallel to that of
science. This focus encouraged art educators to shift attention from variations of self-
expression, from art serving a community purpose, as well as from art having the
mission of stimulating the senses instead to a content-based approach, laying the
foundation for a model that would place art amid school curricula as a discipline.
At the Penn State Seminar of 1965, the notion came to the forefront that it was
necessary to approach art education as a subject worthy of study, or a discipline, with
objectives to be set and reached (Barkan, 1966). Barkan determined that, although
studio art was the foundation of art instruction in the past, for art to be recognized as a
subject worthy of study, art history and art criticism needed to be part of art education
curricula.
Following that seminar, there was a flurry of projects designed to place art
education in the realm of disciplines of study (Barkan, Chapman, & Kern, 1970;
Hubbard & Rouse, 1981; Chapman, 1987; Efland, 1990). The Central Mid-Western
7/28/2019 ATC Dissertation
37/220
28
Regional Educational Laboratory, familiarly known as CEMREL, designed the Aesthetic
Education Program that was a series of instructional packets designed to meet the goal
of molding art education into a subject of study. The Southwest Regional Educational
Laboratory, or SWRL, created a sequential elementary art curriculum that included
aesthetics, art criticism, art history, and art production. Two textbooks were published,
Art: Meaning, Method, and Media by Hubbard and Rouse (1981) and Discover Artby
Laura Chapman (1987), that lead toward the establishment of the idea of art as a
discipline.
On the opposite side of the field was the Arts-in-Education movement. Its
proponents put forward the approach as a means of teaching the arts through other
subjects in an interdisciplinary mode (Efland, 1990). The movement used community-
based resources such as local artists and agencies. The motivation for the movement
was the improvement of self-image and the accommodation special needs of the
students. It had strong anti-establishment and social activism ties. Although it did not
stem from university populations who were in favor of a discipline approach, it brought
notice to the arts of the need for their inclusion in school curricula.
Accountability became a factor in education that asked teachers to plan and write
behavioral objectives and measure actual outcomes in efforts to meet mandates
imposed by state legislatures (Efland, 1990). Although there was some reluctance to
accept this approach, the art teachers who moved forward with this regimen were those
who were moving away from the creative expressionism era and toward more precise
means of measuring progress in learning. Opposing this position were the qualitative
inquiry proponents who preferred a holistic approach to measuring growth in a subject
area. Rather than measuring progress according to measurable objectives the
qualitative caucus preferred to describe the progress of students or classes through
descriptive observations of events and participants.
The years from the Penn State Seminar in 1965 until the excellence movement
of the 1980s recount the movement in art education from a creative expression mode
toward a discipline-centered approach (1990).
According to a study funded by the National Endowment for the Arts, art
education at that time is not viewed as serious; knowledge itself is not viewed as a
7/28/2019 ATC Dissertation
38/220
29
primary educational objective; and those who determine school curricula do not agree
on what arts education is (National Endowment for the Arts, 1988, p.19). This position
indicated a need for change in direction for art education that allowed it to be
established as a continually viable school subject for study. Whether through a
discipline approach, Arts-in-Education, the Accountability movement or Qualitative
Inquiry, art education was moving away from the creative expressionism swing of the
pendulum and toward a paradigm that dictated measurable excellence (Dobbs, 1992;
Doerr, 1984; Efland, 1990; Helberg, 1985; Michael, 1991; Saunders, 1983; Smith, R. A.,
1987c; Zeller, 1984). Discipline-based art education was introduced to educators as
vital to a childs full educational development (Getty, 1985, p. 4). The stage was set
for an approach to address the need for excellence in art education in its breadth and
depth and place it firmly in the curriculum, interwoven throughout other disciplines as
well as throughout the fabric of the cultures of schools. The approach could be taught
nationwide with caveats to address state, district, teacher, and student differences.
Thus, the ideas that bore the fruit called DBAE were planted and nurtured throughout
previous decades.
Summary of History
In the latter half of the twentieth century American education and art education
fluctuated between meeting the personal needs of its students and meeting the financial
needs of their future employers. Progressives, behaviorists, or reconstructionists: each
promoted agendas that were designed to move the nation forward. From the
progressives one can gain greater understanding of child-centered approaches to
education and, by extension, the creative expressionist movement in art (Efland, 1990a;
Hurwitz, 1990; Smithsonian Center for Education and Museum Studies, 2003; Spring,
2004). Behaviorists advanced approaches to education that filtered through the lens of
social Darwinism, through the stimulus-response lens, and rejected notions of
compassion and social responsibility in favor of survival of the fittest (Callahan, 1963;
Efland, 1990a; Gardner, 1991; Rippa, 1992). Reconstructionist and Social Efficiency
approaches focused education on reaping the greatest results from the least
expenditure, the notion of the benefits of mental discipline, and the transformational
7/28/2019 ATC Dissertation
39/220
30
qualities of education (Amburgy, 1990 & 2002; Efland, 1990a; Siegesmund, 1998). At
various times one or more of the approaches dominated the field of education as well as
that of art education.
During this period there were two dominant paradigms in art education known as
creative expressionism and content-based art education. They were based on
progressive, behaviorist, or reconstructionist theories of education or combinations of
the three. The creative self-expression art education periods emphasized a child-
centered approach in which art is given meaning by the student artist (Efland, 1990;
Anderson & Milbrandt, 2005). The practices for which the movement is characterized
are the lack of intervention by a teacher imposing adult art concepts on children and the
inclusion of motivational stimuli such as verbal descriptions designed to assist school
children recall events that might assist in conjuring ideas about which to make art. Art
was a tool to measure and address a childs growth and development. Teachers with
minimal art training could teach art in a classroom if they understood the developmental
stages and could successfully motivate children. Creative problem solving skills were
believed to be the by-product of the creative self-expression movement and could
contribute to improved problem solving in other areas of education through transfer of
the skills learned in art classes into other academic pursuits. The movement flourished
with progressive education approaches.
The behaviorist theories of education came into acceptance with the concern
produced by the launching of Sputnik, the Soviet satellite (Bruner, 1960; Clark, Day, &
Greer, 1987; Efland, 1990). With the apparent success of the Soviet Unions space
program, US education rapidly moved to address the presumed lack of success
demonstrated within the math and science education communities by reforming
curriculum. Discipline- or content-based approaches to education changed the direction
of education away from life-experience curricula of the progressives to approaches in
which fields of study were pursued as disciplines. Art education responded by
promoting an approach that allowed students to become familiar with art as a discipline
worthy of study, a dramatic break from the creative expressionist mode that emphasized
art production. Through this approach students would be taught about the world of art,
with art production as a component of the approach rather than as the foundation of art
7/28/2019 ATC Dissertation
40/220
31
education curricula. Through a variety of content-based approaches, art education
evolved into a player in the excellence movement of the 1980s in response to the
reports issued, such asA Nation at Risk(1983), in which concerns were raised about
the ability of the US to compete globally with other nations in the world market.
Discipline-based art education emerged as the behaviorist camps response to the
perceived challenges facing the country and the need to elevate the degree to which
students understood the world of art through curricula designed to support an approach
that combined art criticism, aesthetics, art history, and art production (Greer, 1984).
Part Two: A Paradigm Shift
Discipline-Based Art Education
Discipline-based art education was the dominant paradigm for the art classroom
for more than twenty years beginning in 1985 (Erickson, 2004; Getty Center for
Education in the Arts, 1985). It has been described as a comprehensive approach to
teaching and learning in the visual arts, developed primarily for K-12 schooling but also
useful in art museums and adult education (Dobbs, 2004). There were other
approaches to art education that emphasized some of the components of discipline-
based art education prior to its espousal and promotion by the J. Paul Getty Trust.Formation of the Getty Center for Education in the Arts in 1982 was one impetus that
put in motion and coordinated the efforts of various proponents of similar approaches to
art education to orchestrate the resulting approach known as discipline-based art
education.
Why Discipline-Based Art Education?
Commonly known by its acronym, DBAE, the discipline-based approach
emerged as part of the excellence movement in response to a national concern over the
quality of American education (Clark, 1984; Efland, 1984, 1988, 1990; Greer, 1984;
Clark, Day & Greer, 1987). In this usage the word, discipline, evolved from the
sciences. By 1957, when Russia launched the satellite, Sputnik, placing America in the
role of runner-up in the science and math arenas, the quality of education in America
7/28/2019 ATC Dissertation
41/220
32
was already an issue. The science arena responded by designing a curriculum in which
there was an organized body of knowledge, specific methods of inquiry, and a
community of scholars who generally agree on the fundamental ideas of their field
(Efland, 1990a, p. 241). It was suggested by Jerome Bruner (1960) that scholars
pursued inquiry in subject area disciplines, and that education could benefit by following
that model to higher levels of learning.
Art as a Subject of Study: The Theoretical Base of DBAE
Those representing the arts determined that art education reflect the attitude that
art be taught as a subject with specific content, scope and sequence, content-specific
goals, and appropriate means of assessment (Eisner, 1965b; Hurwitz, 1990; Smith,
1987). DBAE set its sights on solving the issue of balancing learning accomplished
through direct experience, studio art experiences, with learning accomplished through
intellect, such as art criticism, aesthetics, and art history. Elliot Eisner (1965b)
recommended curricular reforms in which students would not only become familiar with
art media and method, but would also become learn about the world of art. This
approach would be modeled from the disciplinary approach of the sciences, thus
lending merit to the notion that the arts be recognized in scholarly arenas.
Art as a Discipline
The DBAE approach to teaching children about art was not entirely new. The
emphasis on child-centered art had diminished, and greater emphasis was placed on
teaching about the world of art in the 1970s. The emphasis on content lent itself to the
notion that art education was becoming a discipline. Greer (1984) noted this trend and
described the emerging approach as discipline-based art education:
The focus of discipline-based art instruction is on art within general education
and within the context o