Virkning – onyttigt pynt och konstnärligt
uttrycksmedel.
Åsa Haggren, Institutionen för konst och bildvetenskap,
Göteborgs Universitet
When we teach we have also the possibility to practice a personal philosophy of life. My belief in equality and the democratic production of knowledge has steered me towards the view that pedagogy is an entanglement. In practicing an entangled pedagogy, participation is to me the natural choice. In times of rapid change, fear of difference, social injustice, technical advances and non-sustainable lifestyles it matters how we see issues of student autonomy, engagement, the production of knowledge, aesthetics and the role of the teacher.
Toaletter fyllda med konst
PUBLICERAD: MÅNDAG 24 OKTOBER 2011, 12:14 • UPPDATERAD: TORSDAG 12 SEPTEMBER 2013, 13:50Toaletter fyllda med konst
Making art meaningful
In Sweden, art students at upper secondary school have little choice. Sweden bases its whole school structure ondemocratic principles and the curriculum, which is goal-based, is said to give limitless possibilities for a teacher tofacilitate high levels of learning outcomes. I say not so. Or more to the point such a view is theoretically sound but inpractice problematic, particularly with regards to the visual arts.My motivation for this study began after observations from art classes in Sweden and New Zealand and the concernI felt for how differently teachers approached learning outcomes in visual art. I was particularly interested in howNew Zealand schools work with the portfolio method on a national level as a way to set and identify learningoutcomes in upper secondary school students’ art.This study of Swedish and New Zealand school curriculums and visual art teaching practice in both countries aimsto identify underlying reasons for how each country defines and recognises learning outcomes in the visualarts..Observations are to a greater extent from a study trip to two New Zealand upper secondary schools and to alesser extent from Swedish upper secondary schools as this would constitute a much larger study and is perhapsdestined for future research. I am aware of the fact that this study lacks some quantitative validity due to the absenceof comparative observations from several schools in Sweden. I have only made observations from two schools inNew Zealand which further weakens the validity of this studySchool curriculums from Sweden and New Zealand have philosophical differences and place focus on differentaspects of knowledge and learning. The goal-based school curriculum (Sweden) and the outcomes-based curriculum(New Zealand) should and do influence how a subject is taught in the class-room. The difference between the twocountries however is that in Sweden interpretation of these goals allows teachers the right to make subjectivedecisions about levels of learning outcomes and in NZ these levels are nationally recognised. This study aims toshow that the use of student portfolios together with nationally accepted criteria for learning outcomes can be a wayto achieve high standards and equivalence in visual arts as these provide a structure for the teaching and learning ofart-making practice and specifying for students, teachers and parents the appropriate levels of performance a studentneeds to achieve at different assessment levels.This study gives justification to the view that meaningful visual art education occurs when there is an agreement tospecify clearly the lowest levels of learning outcomes (Achieved or pass) and that subsequent assessment levels buildupon this base of knowledge. Visual art education is thus a democratic act in its clarity of objectives andexpectations upon students for it is then that a student can choose. Only when an individual becomes well informedcan choice be meaningful.OPEN Making art meaningful