Assessment is not a bad word. Though it seems that way in art education sometimes. I can empathize with folks who find the term 'exhausting.' Saying the A-word might even trigger some kind of low-grade academic PTSD for some. I think it’s because we’re so used to being abused by it, both as students and then as teachers.
But remember that at its core, assessment is simply about value. What we assess is what we look for and what we look for is what we value. What values are you promoting in your classroom assessment? Are you valuing learning over grades? There is a difference. What about dialogue over monologue? Subjectivity vs false pretenses of objectivity? Vulnerability and risk-taking vs the formulaic and the path of least resistance?
Assessment is not the same as grades. Grades at best serve expediency, but expediency is not compatible with learning any more than it is with art. Galloping through a museum to see as much art as possible is not the way to have meaningful experiences with art. Art is slow. Art is demanding. It asks the viewer to notice something,even reflect on what you notice, as opposed to the rest of daily life when we simply go and do mindlessly.
Meeting with every single student to determine grades is also slow (at least compared to a computerized test or mechanically determined grade). Assessment, if it is to be authentic, is also slow. But I believe that we should have the courage to assess face-to-face and to do so through dialogue. In this fast-paced world, we must slow down for our students’ sakes if we want them to slow down as well. We ended my class this semester with final meetings where I met with all 30 pre-service teachers in my class to assess portfolios of writing and determine a grade together.
Even though we have been graded ad nauseam for the better part of 15 to 20 years of our lives, few and far between are the instances where we share responsibility for our own evaluation or even evaluate ourselves. This seems rather strange. These future teachers will go on to emphasize grading because that is what the system demands; that is what they have been subjected to as students and all they know. But shouldn’t they get to have experiences actually grading SOMEONE before they are in a classroom ACTUALLY grading someone before student teaching? Don’t we, as a field, think that, at the very least, self-assessment might build empathy for students and expand the thinking of these future teachers BEFORE they get into the classroom when they can still ask questions and experiment safely?
I told them it would feel weird and uncomfortable, maybe because evaluation is hard and maybe because they have so little practice self-evaluating in traditional settings. Step into that discomfort. It will be over before they knew it. This semester, I used an analogy that I liked quite a lot because I thought it would be very “sticky” – the tattoo artist. Sure, my students get the logic I explained above, but will they REMEMBER when they are the teacher in charge? My answer was the tattoo artist analogy. I told them that traditionally, a prospective tattoo artist would practice drawing for a long time and maybe practice tattooing a piece of meat from the supermarket. When they wanted to graduate to become a professional, they would tattoo themselves. This has two benefits. First, is your work good enough for you to be willing to wear it? Second, you know how it feels when you do it to someone else. It builds empathy. So it makes sense to give a future teacher the opportunity to share the steering wheel when it comes to their own evaluation so that they know how it feels. The problem is, this analogy may or may not be true, because I’ve heard conflicting accounts. I’ll keep looking for one because the truth matters to me but this one may work for a time.
Some students had to mull over very difficult questions that every teacher faces. Whatever they chose would have lasting consequences. Would they evaluate themselves fairly, as they are expected to evaluate their students? Or would they take advantage of the opportunity? It seemed like an obvious teachable moment to put the ball in their courts. I believe their decisions says a lot about who they will become as teachers, and I thought they all showed character as they practiced wrestling with the tough choices every teacher faces in a less risky environment.
Fortunately, the vast majority of them did very well so I was able to relax a bit. A few conversations were tough and awkward but teachable moments on how to move through disagreement. There was no point where I had to overrule anyone, though there were occasions where I and the student came to terms with final grades that were lower than the student hoped. But there were also occasions where perhaps overly-critical students and I came to terms with grades higher than they expected as well. Nevertheless, they seemed sincere in their understanding of how those grades seemed fair. Overall, I loved the experience and it seemed like they all responded well to it. And I have some evidence to back that up. While I’ll wait until my next post to get my exit survey data, I will share that before their experience with authentic assessment in my course, 39% of the pre-service teachers said they were interested in practicing authentic assessment in their own future classrooms, but by the end of the semester, that number had increased to 68% - an increase of nearly 30%!
On Effort & Assessment
Hearing what my students talk about and write about gives me insight into what they value. What I tried to do was listen. I give my students multiple opportunities to reflect on something and may ask them about something several different ways. I tell them this is because I do not want to use only one bucket to catch a waterfall, as I explain to them. I’m looking for the learning when I’m reading and listening to and observing what my students say and do. If I only look one time, that’s like using one bucket to catch all that information. If I look for something multiple ways, then I will use several buckets and increase my chances of finding what I’m looking for, if it is there. We must be sure we find what we are looking for and not what we are hoping for, and likewise, our students should have the opportunity to prove what they have and have not learned beyond a shadow of a doubt. That is justice, and at the end of the day, that above all else must drive our decision making in the classroom just as it must drive a civil society.
One nearly universal theme I heard in students’ self-evaluations was effort being highly prized, privileged in my opinion from accomplishment or acquiring specific skills or knowledge. I’m afraid that this is something of a lowest common denominator from my point of view. Is the person expending every last ounce of their strength and effort attempting to move a boulder more admirable than the clever person that uses a lever and actually moves the stone? Not to me.
Obviously we all need to put in effort! Obviously EVERY student IDEALLY would normally be operating at the edge of their potential in order for their limitations to expand. I have a hard time imagining a single teacher promoting a lack of effort in their classroom. But how do you begin to weigh or measure it and would that be useful at all? Would everyone be successful if they just put in effort? Sounds ridiculous to me. In my opinion, effort would be a quality of the classroom culture to be valued, modeled, and practiced, rather than something academic to be evaluated. Hasn’t it been our desire to REDUCE the amount of effort required for tasks that has driven our technology? Doesn’t evolution privilege the adaptation and not the effort expended? Surely, it is this emphasis on effort above all else that makes people think that, while learning is often hard, it can also be meaningful and fun. If we measure by effort alone, surely the most dismal learning tasks are then the most beneficial, right? If a teacher doesn't grade effort, that doesn't mean no effort suddenly becomes acceptable. It seems to me we grade their effort when students are being forced to do things.
I wonder if, in practice, prizing even effort leads to a deficit view. The student quit due to their flawed character and lack of effort, not because the system is unfair or irrelevant. “They’re lazy!” is the favorite attack upon the disenfranchised. Yet here at college, after so many years of school, is what is most prized? Not first improvement? Growth? Self-fulfillment? Achievement? Surely, all this represents the institutionalized view, as nearly every high achieving student (future teachers) in my class emphasized effort. To the contrary, the best studio art classes I ever taught were guided by the mantra of a familiar green puppet: Do or do not, there is not try.
I don't look for effort, I want engagement. And I was very pleased to hear many respond very positively to their Creative Growth Goals, which honestly I had wondered if having students choose CGGs would’ve worked. And it didn’t, completely, this first semester by any means (well, I started in the Fall but it was formalized in my Spring class). I was worried because I had to remind several students which goal they had chosen at their midpoint meetings. But they seemed truly engaged in their focus on developing a skill or ability such as idea generation or uncertainty or experimentation.
It’s hard, sometimes, to know with great certainty when you are conferencing with students and reviewing their portfolios that the risk of confirmation bias is extremely STRONG when you AND the students both have a horse in the race. I think we have to weigh our judgments carefully and this is why I seek transparency with my students. But what I took away from their positive responses was not so much the specifics of it but that they responded well to being able to choose a goal that was they then were prompted to weave throughout their coursework. Additionally, much like this assignment, they really benefited from prompts to reflect back on their decisions from the beginning of the semester which they could use as a point of reference to assess growth. Students like feeling like they’re making progress, but in many classes students are not given the opportunity to reflect. Comprehensive tests and papers do not serve this function. But I was happy that the students enjoyed exercising their agency in selecting something in the course they’d like to focus on. This is something I want to more deeply engrain through the core of future classes.
Assessment is rarely easy, but for me it is one of the most important things I do in the classroom. But grades, while attractive to bureaucrats and folks that don’t know much about learning, are not the answer. I told my students at their meetings was that the objective of our final meeting was to take all of the rich experiences we’ve had this semester, the story that you have created this semester, and do our best to fit all of that into one of these odd little shapes (as I point to the OSU grade scale). We lose a lot doing this, because it is nearly impossible to reverse engineer that story out of the funny little shape. But you and I will know that there is a lot of meaning in that shape, even if it is hidden. And most importantly, it is the dialogue, reflection and choice - the essential ingredients of authentic assessment - that my students found meaningful which they will carry with them well after they leave the classroom. Paradoxically, this means slowing down and focusing on those art and creativity values, skills, and dispositions that we will practice the rest of our lives. These are the things I value and so that is what I assess.
In my next post, I’ll share the results of the exit surveys my students completed. What did they think of our time together? Tune in next time and I'll discuss the result and reveal how their data will affect my planning for next year! The challenges of change!
Lastly, thanks for your patience in waiting for this post! It's been a few weeks as I had classes ending and beginning; several major deadlines; and some personal matters all coming at the same time. I appreciate your continued support!
Part 2 of a 3 part series - Part 1 - Part 3
What do we value? “What you value, you talk about.” Walk into nearly any school across this country and chatter about grades permeates every hallway and corner. But not necessarily learning. In schools, we value grades. This has a pernicious effect on what young people and adults believe is important. Grades and testing are more distracting from actual learning than any smartphone or app on the market. I may not have mentioned this before, but I taught at a school where, every morning, along with the pledge of allegiance, every student in the school would recite the following motto out loud in lockstep to start the day:
“School X students will meet or exceed grade level standards as set forth by local, state, and national assessments!”
Talk about a lack of vision. Of values. For what purpose? What about wonder? Or learning? When I say assessment, I don’t mean grades. That is what they meant in that motto though. Students chasing success defined by scores. But the solution can’t simply be eliminating grades. In going gradeless, you can’t simply toss grades out the window without replacing them with something else or you’ll likely create a vacuum of confusion and chaos. Instead, you have to deftly swap one system for another, like Indiana Jones-style except we’re tossing out the bag of sand in favor of something with real value (and with less running hopefully!).
What is required is a culture shift. Not a change in society, at first at least, so much as a change in the culture of individual schools, which stand apart from culture at large. What we can replace grades with is dialogue. Dialogue, for me, is the foundation of assessment. Constructive criticism and care. Grades are monologic - something done to you. We’ve all felt it. That sting of an unfair grade. A 9 out of 10? For what, you nitpicky...?!? You’re subjected to the selective judgment of every teacher you;ve ever had. Compared to the teacher, police wield more physical power and potential for harm over your average person. But the teacher is, in my mind, secondary to the police officer in the amount of unchecked power over the autonomy of other humans. Keep in mind that every day, most every person age eighteen to four, can typically only go to the restroom with the permission of an adult they barely know. An unavoidable biological necessity controlled sometimes by the whims and moods of another person. Doesn’t that strike you as a little odd, philosophically? Why does compulsory attendance in a class or, later on, choosing a course because I might be interested in the subject, inherently give another person the right to judge me? Why do we simply accept that learning and being judged go hand in hand. To be clear, I’m not conflating learning HOW TO MAKE judgments with BEING judged. The latter is the one I’m skeptical skeptical of.
Dialogue, on the contrary, requires the sharing of power. There still exists, perhaps inescapable, a uneven power dynamic. But in dialogue there is a two-way street. Give and take. Dialogic teaching, while certainly time-consuming last semester, allowed me to create an open and authentic channel of communication, or feedback loop, with my students which we both used to improve and develop more complex understandings of the material, each other, and the world. I learned as much, if not more, from dialogue with my students as they learned from me. This is what assessment means to me.
One way I was able to assess my students and my teaching this semester was by using a pre and post survey. Of course, I did plenty of assessing of my students along the way, and as a result, I continually assessed my teaching and course structure overall making tweaks here and there. But it’s not until the end of the semester when my students get to fully reflect on our journey. Today, I’ll be sharing their comments from the exit survey and the SEIs (Student Evaluation of Instruction) they completed. For my survey, I received 29 out of a possible 29 responses because I required the surveys be completed prior to final meetings with students. I asked three open response questions. I’ll go over their comments in this post. In my previous post, I wrote about their quantitative responses. I’ll conclude this series in my next post by bridging last semester with the new semester, part 3: Final Meetings & New Beginnings.
First, I’ll begin with the experiences my students found most memorable. To analyze this qualitative data, I simply counted occurrences of experiences (see below). I’m proud of the thoughtful comments my students left, which were almost entirely positive, but I’m resisting the urge to copy them all below so you won’t be endlessly scrolling. If you’d like to see the comments for yourself, you can find all the results here.
Q1: Please describe your most memorable experience in this course. This experience could be positive or negative.
Total Appearances of Experiences
This data was helpful for me in planning for next semester. Essentially, anything that didn’t receive a mention here is on the chopping block, and even some of the things that were mentioned might still be eliminated from my curriculum. Despite one appearance of guest speaker, I believe based on the feedback I received immediately following our guest speaker’s visit and it’s appearance here that I will pursue a guest speaker next semester to end the course again and will probably continue that as a tradition. With one appearance, monoprinting will return with some slight tweaks as a demonstration of artistic process. However, with only one occurrence of sketchbook, along with some criticism you’ll see later in the student suggestions, I’ve decided that weekly doodles will not continue next semester. I love teaching students how to make sketchbooks, but I prefer to do that if they are going to become an important part of the course. It seemed as though most weeks, students were either rushing or creating doodles that were unrelated to what we were doing in the course. While they did get the students drawing regularly, I’m not sure they were worth the extra time commitment. We also did not have ways of naturally fitting them into class time as I had originally intended.
It seems obvious that the lesson plan presentations were extremely valuable to the students as it was mentioned most by a third of the group. Nearly another third mentioned the Creating Culture experience, followed closely by Clay on the First Day. All of these therefore seem like essential pieces of the puzzle. I only want to bother with things that will stick with students long after they leave my class. We just don’t have time for anything else. Everything else we did last semester is up for major modifications or elimination. The goal is ‘less is more.’ I have to make the response and feedback process more streamlined and efficient if I’m going to be convinced that the approach is practical for K-12 classrooms.
Q2: Please describe your most valuable takeaway from this course.
Baby’s first narrative analysis! I realize writing this that the data I collected last semester is allowing me to employ methods I’ve been learning the last year and a half in my PhD program. It’s interesting to try these out on my own data, even sort of “fun” to try different approaches and try to teach them to myself. I’m seeing how research methods could benefit classroom teachers who want more sophisticated, credible, and accurate pictures of what is going on in their classrooms. It’s disappointing though that teachers across the country aren’t permitted ample time to deeply analyze and apply their own teaching! A thought also occurs to me that it seems a little strange that I’m only employing these methods now, outside of my coursework and that I have not had any opportunity to practice these methods under the guidance of a professor. Something seems wrong about that. It reminds me that classrooms should be places of practice where we try putting things to use. Funny that I learned ABOUT so many different methods without actually learning how to DO any of them. Lots of philosophy, theory, and styles though. *Sigh*
Anyway, I attempted to code student responses the the above question. Coding, as I understand it, is a qualitative method where one searchers for occurrences of certain words, concepts, and themes. This is a mechanism of narrative analysis. First I got out my highlighters and began reading through a print out of the comments. Then I realized that I had a computing machine that might be able to help with this task. So I tried, and quickly learned, that highlighting multiple terms using multiple colors in Microsoft Word is deceptively challenging. Long story short, the “Replace With” tool was the key. In any case, I’ll share a PDF of the coded comments with the total occurrences of various words and concepts. The following categories and concepts emerged from the comments: Art; Creativity & Its Characteristics; Settings & Tools; Effects; and Audience & Agency. You can see the terms that I clustered together to create this categories and probably guess fairly well as to my reasoning for the sake of time. The most prominent terms included “I’ at 42; “art” at 38; “creat” for create, “my” at 28; creative & creativity at 21; “learn” at 22 followed closely by “class” at 21; “valu” for value & valuable at 12; “me” at 12; “lesson” at 9; “student” at 9.
My favorite phrases however were some of the following, as they resonated with my goals for the course:
I have more value than a grade.”
Beyond this, I’m not sure how much there is to be gained from this analysis. If I was to compare these results with my quantitative data from my previous post, I suppose that I would temper my excitement because here I see so many people mentioning how everyone is creative and creativity can be improved, whereas the numbers showed how a number of students seemed confused about creativity being something that is dynamic. Additionally, art was mentioned most but does that conflict with the “art is a privilege” statement that divided the class on the survey?
It’s positive that there were so many mentions of art and creativity, by every student at least once, although that is what I would hope for and even suspect. Two thirds of the group mentioned learning and class specifically so I appreciate the correlation, since the course was focused on art-integration. It seemed as though most statements involved what I would call statements of agency, like “I did this” for example. I wonder if there is a way to measure agency or if I should try to look for changes in agency from the beginning to the end of the course?
I don’t know if there is much else to interpret here. I feel like there is a deeper level of analysis or other tools I could apply but I’m not sure what right now. It was a decent amount of work to analyze the comments but a lot of that could be attributed to learning curve and troubleshooting the software. I’ll try this method again next semester and see if it is more productive. Still, the document is pretty and colorful :)
Q3: What else would you like to share about your experience in this course? This is my first time teaching this course and using some of the methods we have used so any additional feedback regarding your experience in this course would be extremely appreciated. What didn't work for you? What worked for you? What would you change or tweak? What would you keep the same? Thank you!
The last question invited feedback concerning what worked and what didn’t work from my students’ perspectives. I have to say that this was the most HELPFUL feedback I have ever received from students! I truly feel like these comments alone justify the dialogic approach. Generally speaking, this constructive criticism felt like it was coming from colleagues, as if we’re on the same page now at the end of the course. The vast majority of suggestions are things that I wish I had thought of changing or already have thought about changing! Was this the result of establishing a culture of criticality through conversation? Being vulnerable? Transparency? Did I just get lucky by having a very professional group? This is something I’ll be thinking about in the future.
I didn’t employ a specific method of analysis for this section. I simply looked for positive comments (blue), critical comments (pink), and suggested solutions (yellow). For expediency, I’m sharing a PDF of the document as I went over them and made notes by hand and I am too tired/lazy to go back and redo them digitally.
How do you think their proposed changes align with the changes I had already been thinking about? I found that keeping a running list throughout the semester helped me keep track of tweaks I wanted to make in the future. For the most part, I feel like we’re in agreement.
Finally, I would just like to wrap up this post with a little brag by including my SEIs. This is the primary evaluation instrument of the university. In total, I received 14 out of a possible 29 responses. Unfortunately, only half of my students completed them so I don’t really consider the quantitative data very valid. Ironically, THAT is the data I would be primarily judged with (and I mean judged). Though I did receive a 4.9 overall :) On the other hand, what qualitative data I did receive was very positive overall. I was happy and humbled by their kind words:
Honestly one of the best, most dedicated, and prepared instructors I have ever had."
So what do you think? Do you agree with my analysisis…is. Did you see things that I missed? Have any questions? Thinking about collecting your own data about your teaching? Have tips to share? Let me know!
As I stated previously, I will follow up this post with Part 3: Final Meetings & New Beginnings where I will bridge last semester’s final meetings with students and the beginning of a new semester with a brand new group of future teachers. Thank you for reading!"
Part 1 of a 3 part series - Part 2 - Part 3
Numbers. While some art teachers may reject the value of quantitative data, I don’t. It’s WHAT you are measuring that makes the difference. For example, we know that standardized test data is basically trash. I’ve mentioned in a few posts already this past semester how I’ve used data from my class to better inform my teaching and while I would accept the charge that what I’ve done so far is only ‘data light,’ I have nevertheless found the stories in numbers and patterns extremely valuable for my teaching. Shouldn’t that be the guiding principle of all data collection: Is this data valuable?
If there is no change, then nothing has been learned. So one way I was able to assess change in my students this semester was by using a simple self-reporting mechanism, the Likert scale (Strongly agree, somewhat agree, I don’t agree or disagree, somewhat disagree, strongly disagree). I collected self-reports from every student in the form of an Entry and Exit Survey which I gave at the beginning and end of the semester. For the purposes of this post, I’ve combined the somewhat and strongly agrees and disagrees. You can find more specific info as well as all the data here.
As the semester progressed, I realized that there were many questions that I should have asked at the beginning but I didn’t know what I didn’t know yet. Next semester my survey will be more robust. However, what responses I did get were very revealing and while I see tremendous positive gains in some areas I was also left with puzzling questions. This is the challenge of quantitative data - it must be interpreted and analyzed, and that of course involves subjectivity. There are many ways to read the data. As you will see below, results do not always make sense. We must resist the urge to tailor our questions to produce our desired results while also acknowledging that individuals are not purely rational actors and that there will always be a chance of irrational results. Above all, we must keep in mind that self-reports are not 100% accurate, but neither would be any assessment. This being said, let’s jump in.
For the following statements, students were asked to agree or disagree or state that they had no opinion. Let’s start with the good news.
Some people are creative and other people are not.
A major goal for this course is for my students to see all people as having creative potential. Hence, by the end of the semester, my hope was that all students would disagree with the above statement. Out of 29 students, we went from 12 to 26 students who disagreed by the end of the semester. At the beginning of the semester, more than half of my students thought that creativity is a trait that only some people possess. By the end, nearly the entire group thought creativity is something that all people have access to. Remember, these are future classroom teachers who will presumably be more likely to see creative potential in ALL students instead of just a “gifted” or “talented” few. Unfortunately, 2 students still did not see creativity as innate and 1 person had no opinion. But a 14 student swing is HUGE! This was my biggest win by far. How can I continue these gains in the future?
I feel comfortable sharing my opinion about an artwork or image.
Here we went from 19 to 26 students in agreement. It seems 2/3rds of the class was comfortable sharing their opinion regardless. 5 students had no opinion in the beginning while only 3 felt the same at the end. 5 students disagreed with the statement above in the beginning, but by the end not a single student voiced discomfort sharing their opinion about an artwork or image! I think eliminating that resistance in a handful of students is still huge. It was nice to see the time we spent in class talking about artwork paid off!
I feel comfortable leading an art activity or experience.
Here I saw another huge gain. We began with 12 students in agreement and ended with 24! 14 students disagreed with this statement at the beginning while only 2 disagreed by the end! I’m disappointed of course to see that 2 students continue to harbor discomfort at the idea of leading an art exercise, but the gains far outweigh any potential negatives. I haven’t parsed through the data enough to determine whether or not the 2 stubborn students were ones that had decided during the semester to not go into teaching, in which case there was a handful, which could explain the slight negative results. On the other hand, I will certainly think about how I can help all of my students become comfortable sharing opinions about images and leading art exercises in the future. It is also worth remembering that comfort can come with experience and one experience presenting an art activity may not necessarily produce comfort.
In some areas, there was little to no change.
Exploring and making art in a classroom setting is a good use of time.
I’m actually surprised a little bit by this one. We went from 28 students to 29 in agreement. No one disagreed at the beginning so it seems I won over one fence-sitter by the end. Was this self-selection? Students have the option to choose 2 out of 3 art-integration options including visual art, music, and theatre (sadly, no dance). It seems that most everyone who signed up for my visual art integration section already felt that art has value in the classroom. Don’t get me wrong - I LOVE this - but I would’ve guessed that some people might not have seen art as REALLY that valuable (remember this when we get to “art is a privilege” below). Am I expressing an inferiority complex after years of being called a “special” rather than a ‘real’ teacher? Were the students not being completely honest because they know my background as an art teacher? Doubtful. Should I rephrase the question in the future? Perhaps I should ask them to rank “art” in comparison to other subjects. But that would seem to betray the purpose of my class. Ranking would promote divisions between subjects when my class attempts to show how art can connect all subjects. I think the best solution will be to add more verification questions, in other words, ask the same question different ways, to get clearer data. Certainly things to think about for the future but overall it is heartening that a group of classroom teachers believe art is inherently valuable.
I enjoy looking at artwork.
I’m disappointed that I had almost no gains here. 24 students agreed with this statement at the beginning. 24 agreed by the end. 3 students disagreed, while 2 still disagreed by the end. This one I don’t quite get. If you don’t enjoy looking at art, why are you taking a visual art class? When it came to sharing opinions on art (see above), 5 students went from a negative view to a positive or neutral view. Yet here, 2 students continued to hold negative views towards looking at art? In a cynical way, I suppose it doesn't surprise me that some folks would be more comfortable sharing their opinion about something than actually engaging with it (see the comments below any article shared on Facebook, for example). But on the the other hand, I’m more disappointed in myself that I wasn’t able to sway those few stubborn folks. Is “enjoy” too strong a word? Again, I need to ask verification questions. How would the results change, for example, if I asked if they found looking at artwork interesting? Or, do they seek out opportunities to look at artwork? Things to consider for the future for sure.
I like kids.
This is almost a trick question. If you’re going to teach, you better like kids. We don’t teach art, we teach people, I tell my students. If you’re going into teaching, you better answer yes to this question - or get out. I wonder if at some point in the future I will be compelled to counsel a student out of my class based on this question?
At the beginning of the semester, all 29 agreed that they like kids. At the end, one person went to no opinion. As I mentioned before, some students over the course of the semester decided that teaching was not for them. I was told that many of my students take the art-integration courses before actually being accepted into the College of Education, so changes of heart at this early point in their student careers is even more understandable. We had no direct contact with kids through my class, however, so I can’t really attribute any decline here to my course. I also wouldn’t give myself that much credit. But still, I’ll keep my eye on this area i the future.
And now for the bad news and the head-scratchers.
Art is a privilege.
I included this statement to mirror the language that I’ve seen commonly in arts advocacy. “Art is not a privilege” can be seen in materials produced by the Ford Foundation for example. I believe art is a right, a la freedom of expression, and not a privilege. If art teachers and advocates are saying “art is not a privilege” how is this understood by everyday people? Apparently, not very well.
12 students thought art was a privilege at the beginning while 14 students felt art was a privilege by the end - a increase of 2. 8 had no opinion at the start while 6 did at the end. 9 disagreed with the statement at the beginning as well as at the end. This makes no sense to me. After all, EVERY STUDENT thought art was a valuable use of class time (see above). I can only guess that we all had different ideas about what “privilege” means in this context. When I hear “art is a privilege” I hear “art is not for everyone.” This reflects the standard definition of privilege: “a right or immunity granted as a peculiar benefit, advantage, or favor.” Of course, what my students learned during our discussion of “authenticity” earlier in the semester is that a word can mean many different things to many people. I did not use the word privilege in class in this context. For example, I did not say “art is not a privilege” in part because I thought that our class discussions and exercises and assignments would naturally lead them to that conclusion. I would not have expected the results of this data - which makes it all the more important to collect. After all, everyone in the class made, looked at, talked about, and taught using art. So why did half the class think it was a privilege even after all that? My suspicion is that they may have maintained a belief that art is “special,” reinforced by the fact that some schools have art and some don’t, usually due to funding disparities, and practices like calling arts and gym teachers “specials” in some school districts. Additionally, the term “special” appears in the aggregated Google definition but not in Merriam-Webster, in case anyone had to lookup the term mid survey. Do I believe art is special? Yes. Do I believe art is for everyone? Yes. Others, however, may see a conflict where I do not. I can understand how some of the class could have thought that art is for everyone and that some of the class might’ve thought that art is special in a way that deserves respect. But for me, this contradicts what I was trying to accomplish in the course. I shared the Entry survey results with the class but I don’t think I went into what “privilege” might mean for me and the good folks at Merriam-Webster. I remember discussing privately with an art-loving student how she was disappointed to hear that so many in the class thought art was a privilege. She and I were on the same page, but many others were not. I had assumed that some would think art was not for everyone then and fully expected the majority to see art as something that anyone can do at the end because they all had in fact made art more than once in various forms in our course. This did not happen.
I can’t quite view this result as a failure, but moreso as a puzzle. Clearly, there is a disconnect. More importantly, there seems to be a disconnect between what art advocates say and what the general public may hear. We must speak the same language and perhaps the term “privilege” may have lost its communicative value. I will most likely keep this same phrasing for future surveys, but will need to ask additional questions to drill into what is really going on here. Additional statements such as “art is a right” or “every student should have access to art in school” or “art is for everyone” could clarify the views of the class. Perhaps unpacking “privilege” in tandem with our discussion on “authenticity” would be beneficial? Of course, you can’t cover everything you might like, but I think further investigation is needed.
One can become more creative.
Here we finally come to my weakest area. At the end of the day, if the students leaving my course cannot state that they believe a person can learn to be more creative, then I have failed, at least in part, as a teacher. While I saw huge gains in several areas, this feels like a defeat. And again, it is truths like this that make collecting data all the more critical. I would not have assumed a decline in this category, but nevertheless, there was - and that is something I have to face as a professional.
Out of 29 students, 27 agreed that someone can become more creative at the beginning of the semester. By the end, it was 25. A decline of 2. 2 students disagreed at the beginning and the end. Instead of 0 at the beginning, 2 students had no opinion by the end. Being in my class had a negative impact on my students belief that individuals can become more or less creative. While the numbers are small, I can’t ignore them. I’m shocked at the slight regression.
How could this be? What went wrong?
I’m of course very pleased that the vast majority of the group came in and left seeing creativity as dynamic and something that could be improved. This should not be dismissed. But they came that way, through no effort on my part. Another example of self-selection? Throughout the course, I included readings which addressed how creativity can be improved and spoke multiple times of the importance of a growth mindset in general and in regard to creativity specifically. We learned creative models, methods, and research on systematic creativity (see Made to Stick). They all chose a creative growth goal and had to provide evidence for how they had demonstrated creative growth! So how is it possible that my course have no impact on 2 students and a negative impact on 2? What is going on?
While I’m elated that more than half the class realized by the end of the semester that creativity is something that all people possess (see above), how could they also still believe that one cannot become more creative? Is this cognitive dissonance? Did they fail to see themselves as creative somehow? Were the 2 people with fixed trait views of creativity also the 2 people who felt that only some people are creative? I understand that beliefs are difficult, if not impossible, to change, but I’m still surprised. I have work to do here clearly and must reassess my methods. It’s important to see that everyone has creative potential, but it is just as important that creativity be seen as something that can be improved like anything else.
What do you think? Are your interpretations of the data similar to mine or do you see something different?
In the end, do I think going gradeless was worth it? Absolutely. Do I think I could’ve seen the same quantitative results with a more traditional approach? I think that is possible. None of the questions featured here dealt with the assessment, for example. Do I still have a long way to go? Absolutely. But check back soon for How far have we come? Part 2: The Words where I dive into the qualitative data, namely student comments, which have their own story to tell!
NOTE: It has been a tumultuous few weeks since the Fall semester came to a close including traveling, family tragedies and emergencies, and illness. As a result, I apologize that this post has been delayed. My plan is to make 3 posts to bridge this past and upcoming semesters. Here, part one deals some of the quantitative data I collected; whereas part two will examine the qualitative feedback I collected, mostly in the form of student comments; and part three will reflect on our final meetings in which I met with students individually to determine final grades as a preface to next semester just around the corner! Stay tuned and as always, thanks for reading and your support!
I'll mostly be blogging about my experience teaching pre-service teachers about creativity and artmaking. I teach a class called Art Curriculum & Concepts for Teachers for undergrads planning on becoming classroom teachers. Among other things, I'm attempting to "Go Gradeless" while experimenting with more effective approaches to teaching visual art integration.