Janice—Blog number seven: Reflection

My experience of this class was much different from what I expected. I think I had assumed I would be working directly on my thesis; in a way, of course, I was: I just had no idea so many questions and options existed around and for research work. The best readings for me were the articles about qualitative research options: Richardson (1993), Moen (2006), and Slatterly (2003), to cite a few. My thesis work, evolving as it has into a more creative piece of writing, thinking, and even living, as been a real shot in the arm.

The responses from my peers and my critical friend echoed some response and promptings from Leslie: I must pay more attention to academic practice and style. Yes, I can be more far-reaching in my thoughts and writing than I had previously thought, but I can’t be perceived as being sloppy or unaware of expected stylistic forms. Those are the two large “things I learned”: the paradox of increased intellectual freedom along with the increased necessity of documenting and supporting that freedom with a history and community. I won’t get away with writing off the top of my head.

My next is to follow where my journal is taking me. I will read definitive sources for social learning theory with utmost attention—Bandura, (1977), for example, and more intensely allied theories of creativity and psychology: Mumford & Connelly (1994) and Kitchner & Brenner (1990) being two good starting points. I need more internalized knowledge to recognize and respond to those granular teaching moments I am looking for.

The most important piece of knowledge I gained from this class was that I can do this. It is ironic: the basis of my hypothesis (self-efficacy) is what I had to achieve myself. I don’t know what I will remember in one or in five years time: I don’t make predictions of that sort. I suppose I hope I remember being happy in the face of doubt and chaos and turning a corner. I do know one thing: you never know what will happen in the future.

How has my knowledge grown about research? Even though I want to carve out my own path, others have carved out their own paths before me—and part of mine as well—and I must situate myself in a conversation with a research community. There must be strong tentacles to the world of academia. As for skills—I sometimes feel as if I am arm-wrestling sentences into shape; trying to make my words as clear, meaningful, and fluid as I would like them to be. Writing is hard work: I have to write, re-write, edit, deliberate, expand, contract, and ground—over and over again. Writing is an old interest newly revitalized, but I have the experience of my years of reading, thinking, taching, and artmaking to help make it happen. A skill I must work on is organization: my thoughts and notes are scattered over several journals, dozens of notated articles, and in my reading reflections. I need to create system for bringing information together and, sometimes, breaking it apart to go in different directions. I haven’t figured out how to do this yet.

I don’t think I changed the general tenor of my beliefs but perhaps I opened them up to new possibilities, especially in the realm of arts-based research and post-modern qualitative methods. The part of the class that seemed most worth my time, to me at this moment, was the reading and the research proposal draft and the pilot study. I feel good about my research because I was intuitively on the right path, but I had to learn to circumscribe my ideas so they, in turn, could be more focused. The single most important thing I learned about me and my research was trust: to trust my ideas and my ability to shape them.

I didn’t respond much in the discussion board. Most of the time I was lost in the chaos of my own thoughts and sometimes felt overwhelmed reading about the chaos of others. With all the surrounding study we did about research, I am certainly much more aware of the forms it can take and questions and issues it must address. I have more trust in my ability to evaluate research.

If I took this class again I would notice and submit to the academic requirements more quickly. Informal research is a part of daily life, and formal research can be a creative part of an artist and educator’s life as well. I would approach the class with a better understanding and respect for both perspectives.


References:

Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. New York: General Learning Press.

Kitchner, K., & Brenner, H. (1990). Wisdom and reflective judgment: Knowing in the
face of uncertainty. In R.J. Steinberg (Ed.). Wisdom: Its nature, origins and
development (pp. 212-229). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Moen, T. (2006). Reflections on the narrative research approach. International Journal of
Qualitative Research Methods, 5(4), 1-11.

Mumford, M. & Connelly, M. (194). Creativity and problem solving: Cognition,
adaptability, and wisdom. Roeper Review, 16 (4), 241-257.

Richardson, L. (1993). Poetics, dramatics, and transgressive validity :The case of the
skipped line. The Sociological Quarterly, 34(4), 695-710.

Slattery, P. (2003). Troubling the contours of arts-based educational research. Qualitative
Inquiry, 9(2), 192-7.

Janice

Social Learning Theory, Creativity, and the Needs of 21st Century Learners

At times I feel my thesis topic is trying to cover too much; that I am trying to include every single piece of this puzzle of teaching. Yet when I think of teaching--teaching art and moving from student to student, I need to be able to change worlds; to slide between subjects at the drop of a hat. I have to be the most flexible and the most compassionate person in the room. Anything and everything can happen in the art room; I often say art involves everything else in the world, plus itself. Metaphors, associations, experiences can go in any given direction and need to be recognized and articulated on the spot. Therefore, it isn't out of the question that a thesis would be as all-encompassing as the practice it reflects.

My methods will be a bit of everything, too---part argument for the relationship between social learning theory and creativity, part critical action social research in my classroom for advocating the importance of creative dispositions, and part tying all this together with the projected needs of twenty-first century learners. Through voicing and shaping interviews, I also want to tell the tale of learning from the students point of view, because I am wondering: if students aren't aware of their learning, have I done as good a job as I maybe could do? I'm thinking a lot about consciousness.

I was talking to a student the other day, and I was trying to give a lot of verbal encouragement. Somewhere in my head I recalled the words--along the line of--

give verbal encouragement with a suggestion for a possible route forward, and then walk away. Don't hover, let the student absorb this and take it forward herself. I can distinctly remember thinking this as I talked to the student, but I couldn't recall where the words came from. Were they from one of the many articles I was reading? Did I hear them in a dream? I have the strange feeling it was a dream. Finally--finally--I feel it happening. The interest in the work is taking over. Life and work are merging with the creative project--the writing and the teaching.

map for week six

Research Reflection; What's Done and What's Not

There is a lot of research per se on social learning theory: Vygotsky, Bandura, and Pajares. I should probably take it all the way back to Dewey. Some people might say Rorty and Heidegger, but I don't think I have that within me. There is also a good deal of research on students and self-efficacy, but mostly in the realm of athletics and music. I found two dissertations in progress about self-efficacy and the visual arts--one about creativity in general and one about the visual arts, both coming out of Australia. About redefinitions of creativity, there is also no dearth of articles: Zimmerman, Freedman, and Gardner. (I know I am supposed to be putting dates after these names, but forgive me, I am more or less thinking out loud.) I came across a new reference for Gardner in the past day or two and of course left it at school. (It seemed really good--about twenty-first century needs and learning, from his point of view of multiple intelligences.)

Now--as for perceived needs of twenty-first century learners--I like the work of Pat Bassett very much although his lectures don't seem to be in print--maybe it is okay to reference on-line lectures. I have found earlier print materials that points toward his current lecture circuit material. (He is the president of the National Association of Independent Schools, naturally a large figure in my world.) The new Gardner reference also leaned toward the need for affective skills in the twenty-first century.

As far as I have found out so far, there hasn't been a lot of writing connecting the three ideas to the art studio itself. Even the redefinitions of creativity don't address the feelings, moments, and opportunities of a working studio class. This is the first and second part of my thesis. The first part (in my mind at the moment) is a theoretical overlay of the three ideas and how they work together. The second part is either a true separate part, coming mainly from my classroom journal, or interspersed as working examples for the first part.

Now, the third part may be just my vanity. I want to try a creative-type writing of what goes on in the classroom, ostensibly from the viewpoint of the student working on a picture, and if she is realizing the larger life lessons as she is working. It is perhaps my vanity to try creative writing; it is perhaps vanity to think I am teaching larger life lessons. I haven't found much visual art-oriented "creative" writing; it seems to be more prevalent on the sociological fringes. Maybe I just haven't found it yet. But, as a dedicated teacher, I feel if you don't include the student's voice, the thesis is less true.

So--what other questions do I have? I work in an all-girls school--should I acknowledge that and research how girls learn differently from boys? Are they more amenable, if that is the right word, to social learning theory? Do they have an advantage in the "affective" world? (My thesis is not totally in the affective world, however--one of my major "needs" of twenty-first century learners is critical thinking.)

I know I should be adding all the citations I have mentioned in passing--but I don't have them right here, right now. I get the feeling all these smaller assignments are set up in such a way that if we really did them well, our thesis proposal would simply be a matter of putting them together. Alas, that is not me, or not my life, at the moment. It is catch-as catch-can. I will add all the citations in an edit--maybe tomorrow, or at worst, over Thanksgiving break.

Janice--reflections from Week 4

My question as it is right now: How can social learning theory, used as a teaching methodology in the art studio, contribute to reconceptualizations of creativity and the needs of twenty-first century learners?

I don't like the phrase "reconceptualizations of creativity". If "reconceptualizations" is in fact a word, perhaps it ought not to be. I do know I want to marry or merge facets of creativity as defined by Zimmerman (2009) with the idea of a general re-tooling (sorry, hate that word too) of education, as defined by Pat Bassett (2004). Part of me wants to melt in mortification at how pretentious that sounds. I am also saying a very sound methodology for teaching what students will need to be able to do in the future is social learning theory. After telling my "critical friend" partner that she needed to narrow down, I am now wondering if I have two different threads going!

But--this is about our methods. My method will be narrative, I know that--a lot of my work is theoretical--how future learning needs coincide with redefinitions of creativity (beyond self-expression). How social learning theory fits in will be my argument that it is a teaching methodology well-suited to meet those needs. (I think it is beyond my argument to say it is the best--because that means I have to address others. I may have to address other methodologies to have a well-rounded argument, anyway, but it takes off the burden of proof.(?) My data collection from the classroom will be in support of that argument. I plan to use notes--my journal--interviews with students, and other people's observations and perhaps a video or watching myself teach. I'd love to go into other classrooms but I don't know if teachers will be agreeable.

Although I am writing a narrative, I don't really want it to be a straight narrative. I want to have a bit of flexibility with it. If my narrative has structural divisions--in terms of sectionA/section B/ etc., I was thinking of having a "case study" written by me but in the voice of a student inserted between the sections. I am worried this will be too fictional, but it will be from my notes and interviews.

My project is sounding a little nuts, even to me. I am struggling to contain it. I haven't really done the work of containing it yet; I think in the research process we all go through a phase where our ideas expand--as ideas do--they go from one to the next to the next.

Right now it seems to me I have two questions: How do redefinitions of creativity enlarge its role in twenty-first century learning? and How can social learning learning be used to emphasize the efficacy and identification of affective variables in twenty-first century learning?

Somehow I feel these are two sides of the same question. In losing the emphasis on "self-efficacy"--or at least it is getting a little buried--I feel I am losing a little of my intense personal identification. I don't really like that, because I feel the mystery of that identification pushes my energy, courage, boundaries, and writing.

I have to tell you all the truth, I am a bit discouraged at the moment.

Janice: update week 3

I don' t think there is exact research on the commonalities of social learning theory, new conceptualizaitaons of creativity, and self-efficacy, but maybe there is something I will find my way to. Anyway, I am going to start here:


Bandura, A. (1985). Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

This is a book I have to order, and I hope it is not too hard to read; it might be. It is a psychology textbook that costs millions of dollars, but I'm sure it is at the heart of what I have in mind.

Freedman, K. (2010). Rethinking Creativity: A Definition of Contemporary Practice. Art Education, 63(2), 8-15.

We had this article assigned to us sometime in the "Issues" class, I believe, and it means a lot more to me now. I am more interested now in ideas of "creativity" being beyond self-expression and more like what we might call "innovation"; I found the idea of creativity as "an ability to view unseen possibilities and implement them step-by step" especially surprising. This seems identical to me to Bandura's idea of self-efficacy.

Pajares, F. (1997). Current Directions in Self-Efficacy Research. In M Maehr and P.R.Pintren (Eds.) Advances in Motivation and Achievement. Greenwich, CONN: JAI Press, pp.1-49.

This seems like a resource I have to have; a lot of self-efficacy research has been done with athletics and music education, but not art education. Music education makes sense to me, as it is so performance based, but I am interested in the internal voice, as Moen (2009) puts it--that internal voice that may help or prevent a student from taking their artwork into their own realm.

Pajares, F. (2002). Overview of Social Cognitive Theory and of Self-Efficacy. Retrieved 11/07/11 from https://www.emory.edu/EDUCATION?mpf/eff.html

A primer on social learning theory and self-efficacy--which is different from self-esteem. Self-esteem is how you feel about yourself; self-efficacy is the belief that you can accomplish a specific task. For me, it is this building up of accomplished tasks that leads to change (reciprocal determinism) and ultimately new possibilities for a student's future. I would like to explore how art-making is related to "planning the next few steps" as, at the same time, it also demands one remain flexible to what is actually happening in the work itself. (Is there any way to prove this relationship with "life" itself? Do I need to?)

Vygotsky, L.S. (1978). Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Another million-dollar textbook. Will I even understand it? Vygotsky is the other "creator", if you will, of social learning theory. Social learning theory is the teaching method I want to espouse for the art studio; to inarguably lead the way for classes based on project-learning, collaboration, compassion, communication and critical thinking--all those twenty-first century learning buzzwords. (I happen to go along with them whole-heartedly, by the way.)

Zimmerman, E. (2009). Reconceptualizing the Role of Creativity in Art Education Theory and Practice. Studies in Art Education, 50(4), 382-399.

Zimmerman's work in particular seems to bring together the ideas of social learning theory, creativity, and the needs for twenty-first century learners. Reconceptualizing the role of creativity--and recognizing it as a skill our students will need (whether you define creativity as divergent learning, flexibility, or whatever, or all these things) makes the artroom an equal place in the schoolhouse. The only thing is, I believe, is the teacher must be very good at seeing and teaching these skills ("cognitive complexity, affective intensity, personal vision, engaging and persisting, problem finding/problem solving" through the medium of art. Some of my most personally felt aspects of creativity are self-reflective processes and motivation.


Work in progress: Cridland, Francesca, doctoral dissertation on influence of a visual arts program on self-efficacy and achievement. University of Tasmania, Australia.

Do I have the courage to write to this person and ask for clues? I have an e-mail address!

A map will still follow--I'll have time tomorrow to use my AI at school.

Am I supposed to be writing versions of my question as well? Okay, well, that is for the morning also. Tomorrow is an easier day for me.

Janice: map and thoughts

I hope there is a way to actually see this.

My initial interest in assessment began to change with an article discussing problems (and successes) in teaching as identified with particular personality types, and the way particular personality types reveal themselves through art making. (Danielson,1971). From then on my questions began to center on more psychological questions and ultimately on learning theories. (Grossman, 1971). I had, up until this point, been arguing heavily on perception as a major learning outcome for art education; after reading about psychological concepts as applied to the teaching of drawing (Pletcher, 1972)I am now beginning to think more about affective and behavioral issues. I teach in a rigorous academic program so perhaps my greatest teaching "gift" to the students might lie in the field of something like self-efficacy. (Bandura, 2002).

I have many questions, and they are all rather ill-formed:

Is social learning theory an especially effective teaching strategy in the art studio?

Does social learning theory have a significant benefit for the twenty-first century learner's "need" for collaboration and communication?

Can self-efficacy--a believe that one is capable of doing a specific task--in the art studio lead to an understanding of reciprocal determinism putside the art studio and is this an answerable question? How might it be answered? How are the specificities of art making--the "contingencies" of painting in particular, able to lend a new layer of ability in completing a task? (Flexibility, resiliency, motivation)

Can my behavior in the classroom set up opportunities for social learning? What exactly is my function as the "model"?

Do the merits of social learning theory align with the goals of art education?

A final question I think encompasses most of the former questions:

If social learning theory is set up as a paradigm for effective teaching practice, what patterns will emerge? How can I note and record them? Will they be validated by student experience? What influence will this have on student behavior, maturity of process, thinking, and the quality of art making? What learning outcomes--cognitive and affective-- will result?Does this has merit for a teaching agenda for the needs of twenty-first century learners?

I am very glad it is only the second week.

Bandura, A. (1994). Self-efficacy. In V. S. Ramachaudran (Ed.), Encyclopedia of human behavior (Vol. 4, pp. 71-81). New York: Academic Press. (Reprinted in H. Friedman [Ed.], Encyclopedia of mental health. San Diego: Academic Press, 1998).

Grossman, Marvin. (1971). Art Attitudes and Teaching Behavior. Studies in Art Education, 12(3), pp. 64-66.

MacGregor, R. (1972). The Development and Validation of a Perceptual Index for Utilization in the Teaching of Art. Studies in Art Education, 13(2), pp. 11-18.

Pletcher, R. (1972). Teaching Method, Art Strategy Types and Learning in Art. Studies in Art Education, 14(1), pp. 59-65.

Welcome to ARE 6746 Blog

Hello, ARE 6746 students.

We moved the blog outside of Sakai based on your feedback. Remember that the main information about your blog post assignments (you can read it here) still apply. The purpose of this post is to highlight some features about this new blog.

1. Make sure you are signed in to the blog using the email address that you gave to Leslie. She manually added each of you as authors to the blog. When you go to http://are6746.blogspot.com, click "Sign in" in the top right hand corner. If your email address appears in the top right hand corner, you are already signed in.
2. To create a new post, choose "New Post" in the top right hand corner. Give your blog the proper title according to the assignment paper that I linked to above.
3. Write your post.
4. Embed images and video when necessary: Click on the image icon in the toolbar above
   

which will generate a window that looks like this
If the image you would like to add is on your computer, choose "browse" and find the image on your computer. Then choose "Open." If the image you would like to add is on the web, copy and paste the web address into the box beside "URL." Then choose the orange box at the bottom of the screen that says "upload image."

Your image will appear in your blog post. Often the image will be inserted at the very top of the post. You can move the image wherever you want by clicking and dragging or by cutting the image and pasting it into a new location.

In order to upload a video from your computer to your post, you chose the video icon (just to the right of the image icon), which will generate the following window:


Click "browse" and find the video on your computer. Type in the video title and check the box to the left of "I agree to the Upload Terms and Conditions." When you click "Upload Video," your video will be inserted into your post.

If you'd like to embed a video that is online at a site such as youtube, you can follow the directions here. An embedded video will look like this:




5. THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT! When you are finished with the text and images in your post, you must add 2 labels to your post. One label must be your first name (see the labels listed at the bottom of this post to see the label I've created for your name). The other label should be the assignment (e.g., Research Reflection Week 2, Research Reflection Week 3, etc.). If you are posting but it is not in response to a specific assignment, just label it with your name. This will allow for easy sorting both by person and by assignment.

You can see where the labels go on the right side underneath the editor. When you have added your labels, click "Publish Post" (big orange button on left under editor).

I hope this helps us get off to a good start.