October 24, 2009 at 11:10 pm · Filed under Uncategorized and tagged: urban schools, Art, Art Education, art history, urban high school students, teaching in urban school
As I stated in my previous post, I am rethinking my curriculum once again. I originally changed the curriculum to be more focused because the kids in my school come to me with little prior knowledge outside of elementary art ed. Further, there is little continuity from elementary to high school for art ed. Students can go up to the twelfth grade without having taken an art class leaving them to take two classes in their senior year.
So, I’m considering a switch up to the more “traditional” Art I, II, III and IV (AP) structure.
What will changing my curriculum get me?
First, I would be setting things up as units. For me, that would probably mean drawing, painting and ceramics. I will be able to focus on fewer projects or introductory projects that reinforce skill development and then a final project to allow them to showcase what they learned.
Second, the introduction of units would afford me the opportunity to spotlight art historical periods and/or artists versus feeling like I should cover it all.
Third, using the more traditional nomenclature and structure could allow me to control the progress students make.
How might switching to Art I, II, III and IV (AP) hurt me?
Well, first off, I am greatly concerned about those students being able to move through the sequence. I tried this year to implement an Academy with students who believe themselves more dedicated to art as a course, but the restructuring of the schedule at the beginning of the year forced the class to be canceled because of “core” classes which have priority. Would I end up with students who never progress beyond Art II?
Second, would (or should) I keep my other classes: Drawing from Observation, Introduction to Painting and Ceramics classes as separate classes? The unit skills taught in Art I and II would be identical to those taught in those classes, though the level of detail wouldn’t be there, and I would change the projects. But, then again, I could check for interest from the students and then work behind the scenes to provide more advanced students with independent studies.
Lastly, how would I deal with seniors who need two art classes to graduate on time? How would I refine a student’s growing skills in Art II when they are taking Art I concurrently? How could I hold a student accountable for a class they don’t have the knowledge or skill to handle?
Lots of questions. No sure direction for me, yet. Any thoughts from those who presently teach the Art I, II, III and IV (AP) class lineup?
November 6, 2008 at 3:26 pm · Filed under Blogroll, Faith, Family, God, Politics, Pop Culture, Random, Uncategorized and tagged: African American, Barack Obama, Christian republic, Church, Church history, City of God, Conservative, Democrats, George Bush, Obama, Republicans
As I reflect upon the resounding (and expected) victory of Barack Obama in his bid for the Presidency, I am piggy-backing upon my thoughts from my last post. I commented that there was a high degree of emotionalism that drove Obama’s campaign both in political and popular circles. I want to undergird that statement with a couple of other thoughts on why I think Obama so resoundingly won.
First, I think Republican hubris played a huge role in the Democrat (and Obama’s) rise to power. Beginning in 2006 with losses in both the House and the Senate, the Republicans began their steady downward spiral to where they are today. They squandered their opportunity when they were in the same position that the Dems will be in after January. They, ironically, conducted themselves as traditional Democrats and increased the size of government, violating that and other core conservative values. They appeared to believe themselves untouchable. Sadly, they found out they weren’t.
George Bush, in his last four years in office, also squandered much (though hampered in the last two years with an oppositional House and Senate). He simply didn’t do much to further conservative thought and remained, in my mind, aloof as the figurehead of the Republican party. The public’s view of him as everything wrong with our country (not a fair estimate, but understandable) hurt any chance for a Republican to take office. (Ironically, we’ll see how the Dems spin the fact that they have control of both Houses and the Presidency but ALSO have such low approval ratings—even lower than Bush’s.)
Second, and most importantly, I believe the election of Barack Obama had much to do with the failure of the Church to effectively communicate its message to it’s own people. Yes, I didn’t say communicate its message to the World, but to its OWN people—both black and white. While I recently heard that polls indicate that the African-American vote helped Obama, it didn’t put him over the top. There wasn’t a significant increase, overall, in the number of black voters (with the increase coming from in younger voters). Rather, it was white independents and moderates who elected Barack Obama. Nevertheless, I find two points interesting.
First, the African-American community as a whole votes very traditionally on issues such as family and abortion. Ironically, they selected a candidate who is anything but traditional. Did the A-A community know Obama’s stances and voting history on these core moral issues? Or, was it more that they chose to overlook it—much like most of America—in favor of economy and the prize of having a black President? My own experience in urban education leads me to believe that they abdicated their role as salt and light to the World in favor of race. That’s a harsh statement, but, as I indicated, it holds true to what I hear consistently in my all-minority school.
As I indicated previously, polls show that moderates and independents won this election for Obama. Most of those were white. The present state of the mainline Protestant and Catholic churches also shows a clear willingness to PUT ASIDE mandates about life and the family in favor of progressive politics. After all, in their view, times change and the Word of God is a book written by men that must be revisited as society evolves.
I wonder what would happen if evangelical churches made their focus—over the next four years—one of educating their congregations about the core values of the Christian church. Because the Church has a different vocabulary—a different way of looking at the World—our account of life and meaning is vastly different. I have to agree with Robert Lewis Wilken:
Nothing is more needful today than the survival of Christian culture, because in recent generations this culture has become dangerously thin. At this moment in the Church’s history in this country (and in the West more generally) it is less urgent to convince the alternative culture in which we live of the truth of Christ than it is for the Church to tell itself its own story and to nurture its own life, the culture of the city of God, the Christian republic.
I can’t help but wonder what would happen in the 2010 and 2012 elections if the Church was grounded in this way.
November 4, 2008 at 12:44 am · Filed under Politics, Pop Culture, Random, Uncategorized and tagged: Barack Obama, Election, John McCain, McCain, Obama, Presidency, Presidential Election
I’ve been reflecting more earnestly these past two weeks as students have been talking more openly about their reasons for voting for Obama. Obviously, I’ve been listening for quite some time now, but the past two weeks—the last few days in particular—have been particularly poignantly. Frankly, I’ve listened (and read) Obama’s words and been intrigued as to what is so new and hopeful about him personally and his message professionally.
If you do a cursory examination of ads and political paraphernalia from the recent past, you’ll notice that during the recent past principles such as “hope” and “change” are dominant. This has caused me to ponder why this particular candidate has infused such words with so much more meaning as to win the election with so little experience and such damaging rhetoric.
It’s the conversations I’ve listened in on and participated in that has given me my answer and that answer rests in pure emotionalism. I know that sounds simplistic but the complicated answers about the sensibility of his political stances don’t make sense. No, I ground my argument not in politics because, frankly, the average American doesn’t care much for politics. I think it’s also clear just from the complexity that we’ve allowed our political systems to become mired under. After all, who has time to research all that the candidates truly stand for? Even the sites which purport to be nonpartisan fact-checking sites are proving to be less than genuine.
Rather, my argument is founded in pop cultures’ fascination with the image and the new. When my students go off about Obama, the point is clear that they’re not interested in answers as to why I can’t vote for him. Rather, they are more keen on emotionalism and vitriol. Once again, this spirit isn’t new with this election. Our election process has become all about promises that neither candidate can deliver on.
And, it’s the emotionalism of today that has people flocking to Obama instead of reflecting on the potential damages his policies will be for generations to come.
It’s late. I’ll post more tomorrow.
October 4, 2008 at 12:34 pm · Filed under Art, Education, Uncategorized and tagged: Art Education, disinterested students, Elements of Design, Principles of Design, teaching in urban school
The first month of school has passed. Over the summer I thought through what I would cover in the new classes I got approval for teaching.
Unfortunately, while I can change course content I can’t change my students’ hearts. This year, like last, is proving no different with regards to that. I was hoping my frustration level would have matured but my disappointment is already peaking.
I started teaching the kids about the Elements and Principles of Design by tying it to a nonrepresentational abstract drawing project. I showed examples of other black and white abstract works and talked the students through an initial; taking the definitions of the Elements and Principles and describing how I would write about it for that piece of art.
I read through some of the papers and many were poorly done. Because I decided to have them write once a week on a different piece—describing how the artist used the Elements and Principles—I realize now that I will have to provide them with an actual writing sample.
I’ll keep you all posted.
Subscribe to My Blog