I’ve started reading Creativity for Life by Eric Maisel. During the book’s Introduction, the author touches upon the importance of attention and practice since they play are such integral pieces of living the creative life. I tell my high school students all the time that without practice they will always be frustrated in their attempts to get better at drawing what they see, mixing the colors that they want, molding the clay into the correct shape and manipulating the pen tool in Adobe Illustrator. Working hand-in-glove with skills practice, the art student must learn how to be mindful of the World around him/her.

Presently, I am teaching my Intro to Painting students some simple drawing skills before we launch into still life. So, we discuss simplifying images into basic shapes before rounding out corners and adding the details. We also address relationships: how does one object relate to another? Is it taller or shorter? Is it fatter or thinner? How can we use negative space to help us record what we see? The questions go on. It is initially overwhelming for them but I want to demonstrate to them the necessary self-talk to help them achieve their goals.

Truth be told, though, I didn’t start reading the book for my students. Rather, I am reading it for myself. When Dr. Maisel talks about attention, he’s not meaning a classroom setting per se. I’ve extrapolated his meaning because I do believe it speaks equally powerfully to students in a high school setting.

In the final analysis, Dr. Maisel wants to remind ME of the many ways I’ve allowed my art to be put off because of the many facets of my so-called busy life.

If your truth is that your life is out of control and creativity is just one of the many things that you aren’t attending to, stand up and admit that to yourself, even if it means that you must change everything. Nor can you do this truth telling just once or twice: you need to do it today, tomorrow, and forever. (pg. xviii)

What I’ve read so far is just what the doctor ordered (no pun intended).

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?

I redid my curriculum last year and find myself already back at the drawing board (no pun intended) as I project myself into next year. When I first took the job the default class was Studio Art I and II. Unfortunately, no one ever seemed to progress to Studio Art II.

Now, I teach four classes: Ceramics, Intro to Painting, Drawing from Observation and Art & Design Technology. However, as it stands now, I’m really considering collapsing the first three into the traditional Art I, Art II, Art III and Art IV (AP?) structure.

I broke the skills out after believing I’d get students with a more clear perspective on what they would be learning and that would help focus them on learning-specific skills towards a more specific goal (vs. the generalized goals in a survey course). Well, I’m not so sure that was a wise move after having interacted with my urban student population (who exhibit little to no prior knowledge with art) during these past few years.

I’ll lay out a few ideas in the coming posts; however, in the interim, I would love to hear how some other art teachers implement their programs. What do you cover in Art I, II and III? What do you call those types of classes at your school?

So, until next time.

Last year, I did a “quilt” project with Trish Maunder, who works with the Faith Ringgold Foundation. Trish does her own story quilt idea in school classrooms. During that time she also educates students about Faith and her story quilts.

Students pick a theme and then each student translates that theme into a personalized image. They also need to pick a famous quote or write a poem to accompany their image. The pieces are glued onto a larger piece of canvas with fabric strips covering the seams and then a fabric border is set around the whole thing. They turn out really well.

Well, the founder of my school saw the quilt my class did and wanted another one to auction off at an annual fund-raising event. Long story short, I exploded the original idea into a series of smaller quilts based on the founding principles of the school’s charter IN ADDITION TO the large quilt that would document the school’s growth from conception to fruition. It’s moments like that where I think to myself, “I know, let me put this bag over my head so you can all beat me with a stick.”

Well, the students let me down at the end of last year and I didn’t get much done. So, I ended up having to hijack my two painting classes to complete the work. It’s going to take the entire quarter to get all of the quilts done. I’m just hopeful that when they are all put together that they are strong pieces. Of course, they better sell too! LOL!

Friends tell me they get roped into doing things like this too. Why do we, as art teachers, fall for this stuff? I know on some level I liked the original idea and wanted to see it come to pass. In the end, though, I need to remember my ADD tendency to over-commit. It’s during those moments that I need to remind myself to be practical and realistic. In the end, I know my students better than any administrator because I work with them every day.

So, lesson learned. In the end, though, I’m thankful to 1) have a job and 2) have a job teaching art.

I came back from this year’s Art Educators of New Jersey Fall Conference with some new things to think about. I have to admit to wondering what this year’s conference was going to be like since the State refused the petition for a waiver for schools to cover overnight stays. But, the hotel was booked and things seemed just as crowded as last year.

While my school couldn’t cover my stay at the hotel, they did cover my food, tolls, registration/membership and mileage. The mileage coverage will bring my car rental to about $2-3. (My car has 195k miles on it and the engine smokes if I drive it longer than 15 minutes. LOL!)

I have to admit that one of the classes I signed up for was a dud primarily because the instructor for the class left too much time (an hour and a half) for “playing” and “experimentation” versus walking us through doing certain techniques with the medium. To me, direct instruction in those venues seems to have more value for participants. But, that’s me.

The non-hands on wire animal sculpture session was great and is something I can immediately bring to my classes this year. This plus a couple of other events made it a worthwhile adventure.

I’d love to be able to go to the National Art Educators Conference in Baltimore next year but I can’t swing being away from the family. Plus, my school probably won’t foot the bill. I may try to get there for a day. We’ll see.

Today was my first day NOT in class. All last week I enjoyed participating in The Academy in Your Classroom taught by Charles Muldowney at the Pennsylvania Academy of Fine Art (PAFA). It was a one-week intensive that was both exhausting and glorious. I’ll be posting the work I did either later tonight or tomorrow. Suffice it to say, I now am longing to get my MFA. (Boy, where are those rich relatives when you need them?)

If you’ve not heard of PAFA, I would recommend you check out their program.

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.

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.

Is it just me or is it really just hypocritical that people get bent out of shape over NCLB (No Child Left Behind) whereas the SAT has been around for (seemingly) forever? Ok, NCLB is about federal funds but the principle remains the same, right?

It all comes down to a single test being the defining piece of information about your ability to perform well in college (and, to some, life).

I’ve received a few responses to my last post concerning my students’ complaints during class (Intro to Painting, in particular). I was going to respond to them individually but I’ve decided it would be better to clarify my thoughts in a formal post.

The comments I’ve received can be summarized by Daniel over at kungfu komix—

“Ignore them. Students are always that way.”

I’m sympathetic to this sentiment. On some level I think any art teacher who deals with urban kids or kids taking introductory courses needs to be aware of this (seemingly) pervasive dismissive attitude.

I should have clarified myself in the original post that my distress is also (and perhaps more so) related to the incessant talking that occurs while I’m trying to teach. When I try to address it, the students don’t get it. Sadly, their insensitivity is what most distresses (and, frankly, scares) me.

It drains me because waiting for them to get quiet—which is what I was instructed to do by an administrator— causes my projects to take forever to get done or move forward. And, the fact that the lesson gets drawn out causes MORE complaining from my students. (Yes, they’re clueless to the fact that THEY are the root cause of the delay.)

The students’ insensitivity scares me because it reinforces to me how shortsighted they are to how their own behavior is negatively affecting their education. I’ve tried to clue them in to the fact that, unless they go into a science, medical or engineering field they would use most of the higher math they are learning. BUT, the skills I’m teaching them could be a hobby they enjoy until the day they die. Well, maybe the day BEFORE they die. LOL!

Hopefully, this fills in the gaps on my frustration regarding my students lack of motivation. Additional thoughts anyone?