Blog 18

How does learning in, through or about art change when we begin to look at moving beyond a standard, Western European based, middle class curriculum? What do these "special" cases reveal to us about the central issues for our practice as art educator?

To a large degree, I think this question is answered in the previous blog. When we move beyond curriculum, the focus changes from general skills and art appreciation to individualized growth. Art "students" at this point can grow or not, become more skilled or not, appreciate something new or not, as they choose - what matters is whether the experience is valuable to the individual student, and if it hasn't been, then they don't have to pursue it any farther. I think this points out both the strengths and flaws of the education system in general. Its strengths is that it provides students with a general platform within which to pursue individual interesting and goals in virtually any direction. Its weaknesses, however, lie within the limitations of generalization, budget, and societal values that are contained within the culture of both society and the educational system. What do we as art teachers teach? Is it skills? Values? Appreciation? Straight curriculum? Difficult choices, and often it is left to the individual teacher to decide where to put her or his energy and focus.