Curriculum - Day 3

Freedman:Freedman begins this chapter by discussing the history of art history. He discusses how art history should be considered as more than old, pretty drawings, but also in their wider social contexts including political, economic, racial and gender concerns. This certainly makes sense to me as it gives students a stronger foundation for the importance of the artwork, which they can connect to their lives and personal concerns. Freedman then goes on to describe the variety of art historical discourses that affect the place of visual culture and art history within art education. He explains that the presentation of a linear chronology of events in art history, “…has limited an appreciation of the profound consequences of influence by certain social, gender, and cultural groups” (48). To put it plainly, it seems clear to me that old white dudes have had a strong influence on how art history is presented in education and this influence is something that must be considered when discerning the biases, accessibility, and relevance of what is present to students. Freedman then discusses the importance of contexts in art history. He specifies two types of contexts: production contexts and viewing contexts. In my opinion one of the most important points that Freedman makes about contexts is that, “Contexts provide the conceptual connections that make images worthy of study and is as much as part of a work of art as its form, function, or symbolic meaning” ( 51). In Freedman’s discussion of quality he says traditionally, “…the only art worth teaching is ‘good’ art and good art conveys ‘goodness’ (such as elevated values, conventional design qualities, craftsmanship” (53). It is baffling to me that somewhere along the line people thought that they could accurately select the good art that should be taught. Setting a definition for ‘good art’ might be even harder than our task in class today of defining art. Furthermore, as Freedman goes on to point out this is dangerous as the definition of good art likely serves the interests of particular classes, genders, races, etc (ie, old white dudes). I was also intrigued by what Freedman wrote about emotions in education. He says that emotions have traditionally been considered separate from learning. However, engagement and curiosity and triggered by emotions. Shouldn’t we want students to care about what they are learning on an emotional level? The social and emotional aspects of learning have increasingly become part of the educational curriculum debate. Post-formal thinking includes the importance of socially constructed knowledge, social and informational patterns, process and connections, and contextualization (81).  It is clear that learning is not a simple linear presentation of facts and skills. We must connect our curricular content to the factors that influence the lives of students. Man of Steel:I think that Serra’s work is certainly one that makes you acutely aware of your sense of place. Not in the way that someone like Pepon Orsario does, but in that his work compels you to move around it and interact with it causing the viewer to become aware of their body’s position in time and space. As explained in the article by the filmmaker and the holocaust writer people find connections to Serra’s work in their own lives. As Freedman has been discussing, it is innate for people to seek to find a personal meaning in art. Humans have a draw to connect to other humans through many forms of communication, obviously including art. As teachers we seek to help our students make these connections that they can feel the spark to learn and create. Transmediation as a metaphor for New Literacies in Multimedia Classrooms:This article discusses how students are called upon daily to traverse and make sense of many different sign systems. However, despite students already understanding the world outside of school in a transmedial manner, education continues to push for students that are “verbocentric.” It seems clear to me that in our rapidly changing world a focus on reading and writing will not be enough to prepare our students to be  informed and engaged members of society. Our systems of communication are changing and our educational models should change to reflect this. By allowing students to choose to respond and construct knowledge through transmediation we allow for a greater degree of understanding and meaning.  Verbocnetric students should not be the only type of student that the education system chooses to provide a platform for success for.