UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

An interpretive study of elementary school teachers' descriptive accounts of the art teaching task Rafferty, Pat 1987

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1987_A2 R33.pdf [ 12.41MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0054716.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0054716-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0054716-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0054716-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0054716-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0054716-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0054716-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0054716-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0054716.ris

Full Text

A N INTERPRETIVE STUDY OF E L E M E N T A R Y SCHOOL TEACHERS ' DESCRIPTIVE ACCOUNTS OF T H E ART TEACHING TASK By PAT RAFFERTY M . E d . , The University of Alberta, 1971 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL F U L F I L L M E N T OF T H E REQUIREMENTS FOR T H E DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF EDUCATION in T H E F A C U L T Y OF G R A D U A T E STUDIES (Curriculum and Instructional Studies) We accept this thesis as conforming to the required standard T H E UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH C O L U M B I A March 1987 © Pat Rafferty, 1987 In presenting this thesis in partial fulfilment of the requirements for an advanced degree at the University of British Columbia, I agree that the Library shall make it freely available for reference and study. I further agree that permission for extensive copying of this thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the head of my department or by his or her representatives. It is understood that copying or publication of this thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written permission. Department of ^JSJAJSP^JJ^J am/l ^J/n ^ 2s, J J ^ 7M * > ^ f e < ^ / ^ , The University of British Columbia 1956 Main Mall Vancouver, Canada V6T 1Y3 ABSTRACT Art educators perceive a state of disjuncture in the field when what is persistently practiced in elementary schools as art stands in opposition to basic tenets about the teaching and learning of art. Two reasons are given to explain this sense of disjuncture. First, art education orientations and research associated scholarship are posited to be less than suc-cessful in disclosing to teachers what is educationally relevant. Neither a child-centered nor a discipline-centered orientation seems to have considered the adjustive effort teachers make in translating intended purposes into classroom practice. Second, a school art orientation is perceived to be in opposition to art education ideals. Recent studies suggest that features of the classroom setting and the strategies teachers use to make them comprehensible may have an impact on the outcome of instruction in art. Guided by a theoretical stance developed from the literature on commonsense knowl-edge, I adopted a method of approach to investigate teachers' interpretive accounts of the teaching and learning of art. Observation and interview strategies were used. I discovered two guidelines teachers consulted, and I examined the context in which the guidelines and events mutually elaborate one another. 1. When properly programmed, an art task guides the synchronization of an aggregate of recognizable and approved action, and 2. The use of the art classificatory scheme of structured and experimental art activities in practice is contingent on maintaining this programmatic course of action. Teachers' accounts revealed four features useful in making their work recognizable and ap-proved: pacing and phasing of action, physical conditions, thematic content, and effort. The features elaborated a proper programmatic effect and structured art activities over experi-mental ones as a way of achieving this effect. This kind of activity was described as school-like and successfully addresses the problem of how to regulate the efforts of an aggregate ii of children over a specified period of time with due respect for order. The prescription for a preformulated content and stylistic form of art determined acceptable effort. Ideally, experimental art activities were understood to heighten personal awareness by encouraging the child to be more of a task determiner. With less opportunity to rely on stock responses, because the relevance of idiosyncratic action had to be determined anew whenever this kind of activity was undertaken, teachers chose to set this kind of activity aside until conditions became ideal. The difficulty children had in deciding what was in-tended by the invitation to experiment was not recognized as significant. Choice of structured art activities appears to be attributed to two related factors: a taken-for-granted conception of the requirements for organizational control and an unresolved conception of experimental art activities in the context of this organizational structure. This in-school orientation does not seem to indicate a rejection of formally ap-proved art education orientations, but rather an unquestioning acceptance of the practical necessity of organizational control acquired as a result of teaching experience. These demands determined what is possible in art. Basic tenets of art education intended to have educational consequences have been indefinitely set aside, unwittingly reducing children's in-volvement in art and teachers' responsibility to assist children in interacting with the disci-pline. Reified conventions such as freedom of expression and experimentation have made art education remote by creating a chasm between theory and practice, implying that art educa-tion can be dealt with at a theoretical level without consideration of how teachers handle everyday experience. Reasonable conclusions to be drawn from evidence provided in this study are that educators need an approach to art education that will not artificially produce the gap that structured art activities have come to f i l l . It would have to bridge the gap in a manner that recognizes art education orientations (theory) and what teachers do with them (practice) as aspects of the same thing. The present study is a first step toward reflective intervention in the taken-for-granted ways teachers and art educators think about what they do. iii If it is important for children to interact with the developed structure of the art edu-cation discipline, and if teachers are to take responsibility for ensuring that the art educa-tion experience takes place, then change would have to be urged by apprising teachers, art educators, and others of the state of disjuncture reported here, and how factors associated with it have come to complement and contradict the interchange between the goals of art education and the school as a workplace. iv A C K N O W L E D G M E N T S I would like to acknowledge the assistance and advice of the members of my committee: Dr . N . Hersom, Dr . J . Gray, Dr. L . Daniels, and Dr . K . Stoddart. I am very appreciative of their wisdom and support in allowing me the necessary flexibility during what seemed to be a long process of searching and re-searching. I extend a large thank you to the teachers who volunteered for the study. I wish to thank Naomi Stinson for carefully overseeing the typing and editing of this manuscript and for her welcome advice about many facets of its presentation. Most of all, I want to acknowledge my husband Jack, who through the power of the person he is provided moral sustenance and encouragement. v Table of Contents ABSTRACT: i i Acknowledgments: v CH A P TER I: INTRODUCTION 1 Scope of the Study 6 Art Education Orientations 7 A Child-Centered Art Education Orientation 11 A Discipline-Centered Art Education Orientation 13 The School Art Style as an Orientation 21 Summary 27 Purpose 30 CH A P TER II: COMMONSENSE K N O W L E D G E : A G R O U N D FOR INQUIRY 31 Introduction 31 Commonsense Knowledge in Everyday Life 32 The Natural Attitude 33 Stock of Knowledge at Hand 37 Commonsense Reasoning 39 Commonsense Knowledge as a System of Relevance 42 Topical Relevance 43 Interpretational Relevance 44 Motivational Relevance 45 Ethnomethodology 46 Descriptive Accounts: The Managed Accomplishment of a Sense of Social Order 47 Accounting Practices: An Individual's Method of Accomplishment 48 Summary 51 C H A P T E R III: THE CONSTITUTION OF QUESTIONS 53 vi Introduction 53 The Natural Attitude 53 Question 55 The Stock of Knowledge at Hand 55 Question 55 Commonsense Reasoning 55 Question 56 Summary 56 C H A P T E R IV: DESIGN OF INQUIRY 57 Introduction 57 Gaining Entry Into Two School Settings 58 My Role as a Participant Observer 62 My Role as Observer/Interviewer 63 Grand-Tour Observations 64 Mini-Tour Observations 65 Design of the Analysis of a Teacher's Accounting Practices 65 The Documentary Method of Interpretation 66 Interpretive Procedures 68 1. The Reciprocity of Perspectives 69 2. Normal Form 73 3. The Et Cetera Assumption 75 4. Descriptive Accounts as Indexical Expressions 77 Summary 80 C H A P T E R V : FINDINGS: SOURCES OF K N O W L E D G E I N F O R M I N G THE A R T T E A C H I N G TASK 82 Introduction 82 The Institutional Setting Informing the Art Teaching Task 83 Teacher Asserted Knowledge as Guidelines for the Art Teaching Task 89 Programmed Action 89 vii The Art Classificatory Scheme 95 Structured Art Activities ; 95 Experimental Art Activities 97 Summary 100 C H A P T E R V I : F INDINGS: T E A C H I N G GUIDELINES A N D THE STRATEGIES THAT M A K E T H E M R E C O G N I Z A B L E 102 Introduction 102 The Pacing and Phasing of Action in Art 103 The Physical Condition of the Setting 117 Thematic Content and Stylistic Form of Art 123 Assessment of Effort in Art 134 Summary .' 138 C H A P T E R VII: S U M M A R Y OF T H E STUDY, IMPLICATIONS, A N D R E C O M M E N D A T I O N S FOR F U R T H E R STUDY 145 Introduction 145 Summary of the Study 145 Concluding Remarks 153 Implications 159 Recommendations 165 R E F E R E N C E S : 168 Appendix A : Excerpt from the Original Transcript of Teacher A 174 Appendix B : Excerpt from the Original Transcript of Teacher G 182 Appendix C : Recommended Allotted Times for School Subjects: The Province of Alberta 189 Appendix D : School Organization and Operation 190 Appendix E : Past Course Registrations 191 Appendix F : University of Alberta—Faculty of Education Practicum Progress Report Elementary Phase III Practicum 192 viii Appendix G : Child Art Appendix H : Child Art Appendix I: Child Art Appendix J : Child Art Appendix K : Child Art C H A P T E R I I N T R O D U C T I O N Historically, art education has been grounded in the belief that art teachers can be prepared to teach art that will make a difference in the lives of children. Knowledge of this historical development reveals (Chapman, 1979a; Efland, 1979; Eisner, 1984; Lanier, 1980) a diverse range of aims and rationales posited as art education orientations for the teaching of art in our elementary schools. Four art education orientations developed under the influence of the history of aesthetics and aligned with theoretical positions in the field of psychology structure the field of art education. They have been described by Efland (1979) as mimetic, pragmatic, expressive and objective orientations. An extensive amount of research and devel-opment in art education on instructional theory and practice has focused on what are popu-larly called a child-centered orientation and a discipline-centered orientation as hybrids of the four original orientations cited above (Bersson, 1986; Chapman, 1979a; Dorn, 1976; Eisner, 1973; Greer, 1984; Kern, 1984; Wieder, 1975). The view of art teaching and learning inherent in these formulations explains behavior as being typical, predictable, and describ-able. Through the adoption of any one of the orientations it is conceived that a teacher would to some extent be able to determine the quality and kind of art education experienced in an elementary classroom. Deeply embedded in foundational assumptions having to do with a child-centered orientation is the belief that formal teaching tends to coerce an individual's expressive free-dom. Developmental ideas emerging from the psychoanalystic theories of Erickson favor the nurturant aspects of teaching (Efland, 1985). The foundational assumptions of the discipline-centered orientation received the support of Tyler (1949) who assessed the state of research and development in education and advocated that programs stipulate clearly de-fined objectives drawn from a progressive orientation focusing on the child to find out what 2 kind of interests he/she has and an essentialist orientation supported by a large body of universally accepted knowledge collected over time. Tyler signified in his writing how educa-tional objectives can be filtered through a philosophical and psychological screen that deter-mines the essential conditions requisite for teaching and learning. The idea of a discipline -centered orientation was influenced also by the work of Jerome Bruner (Efland, 1985) who proposed the notion of utilizing the structure of a discipline and methods of inquiry within a domain of knowledge to formalize educational expectations. Both orientations appeal to the formulation of theory consisting of presuppositions taken to be intellectually purposeful and relevant in guiding the successful undertaking of the teaching and learning of art. When undertaken as intended, they would improve the quality of the teaching and learning of art in our elementary schools. Art activities devoid of ideals held by art education would no longer be undertaken. In summary, what it would take to successfully accomplish the teach-ing and learning of art is thought to be guided by two desired outcomes: the adoption by the classroom teacher of an art education orientation, and as a consequence the restraint of "school art" and the "school art style" taken to stand in opposition to what art education holds to be true. Nevertheless, statements made by a number of art educators (Bersson, 1986; Dorn, 1984; Chapman, 1979a, 1979b; Eisner, 1979, 1982, 1984; Feldman, 1980; Lanier, 1980, 1984; Reimer, 1979) bring to question the uncertain state of an art education profession that has failed to impress upon teachers in the field the importance of the adoption and implementa-tion of curricula with rationales informed by art education orientations. They decry the state of disjuncture in the field of art education wherein what gets done in an elementary school as art resists reform and stands in opposition to what is believed to be true about how art should be taught. Chapman (1982), Efland (1976), Greer (1984), and Madeja (1980), have spoken out against a kind of practice which persists in the elementary art classroom suggesting it is devoid of what art education holds to be true about art and instructional theory. Day (1979), supporting art education orientations to teaching and learning, com-ments "So called 'art' projects which cannot claim validity either from the direction of child 3 art or from the direction of the real world of art are misnamed" (p. 122). Efland (1976, p. 38), an art educator, admits that "school art" with its own unique presentation bears little relationship to what art educators study and understand as child art. He states, "In my view the presence of the school art style can be explained as a result of the conflicts that arise between a rhetoric articulating the manifest functions and the latent functions which go unstated" (p. 40). Efland's statement makes reference to two conditions commonly put forward to explain why art teaching and learning have not achieved the standard expecta-tions of an art education profession. First, with both the child-centered and the discipline-centered orientations there has been an expectation that the intended meaning put forth in documents of various kinds such as professional journals, curriculum guides, programs of study, education textbooks, and other reading matter is what will be understood and acted upon by the teacher in the classroom. Each orientation claims its own distinctive theoretical thrust while sharing in common the assumption that a procedural definition of art which delimits how teachers and students interact is desirable and attainable. That is, in all this there is the suggestion of a taken-for-granted "shared systems of symbols and meanings supporting an assumption of cognitive consensus" (Wilson, 1970, p. 699) on the part of art educators as well as those undertaking training in art education. This assumption views the understanding implicit in the teaching of art as governed by a shared system of meanings across a variety of contexts; hence, knowledge that is taken for granted sustains a sense of being independent of any one person's biographical predicament. It has been suggested (Barzun, 1978; Eisner, 1982, 1984; Greer, 1984; LaChappelle, 1983; Lanier, 1980; Nadaner, 1983) that art education has been preoccupied with theory and research in pursuit of the one right model. That is, in establishing the legitimacy of art education using knowledge, the meaning of which is constructed in a context removed from actual classroom practice, we have overlooked the adjustive effort necessary whenever a teacher transforms presup-positions formulated elsewhere into classroom practice. Art education orientations support a notion of the art teaching task transcending problems posed in the classroom context while retaining the original intentions of the orientations. More particularly, while art education 4 has attempted to create models which give evidence of an intellectual grasp of a shared fund of common knowledge, in actuality the intended meaning does not appear to be imparted. The child-centered orientation is loosely coupled and only suggestive of what it would take to make it operational (DeFrancesco, 1958; Allison, 1980; Bersson, 1986; Wilson & Wilson, 1979; Wilson, 1977). Curriculum guides, textbooks, and other reading matter claiming to support a discipline-centered orientation give evidence of an insubstantial rendering of the intended meaning and purpose deemed necessary to guide classroom practice using this ap-proach (Chapman, 1985; Geahighan, 1976; Clark, 1984; Kern, 1984; Bullough & Goldstein, 1984). Second, in designating what goes on in the art classroom as "school art" and the "school art style," we have simply acknowledged the presence of what goes on as troublesome obstacles standing in the way of the better reasoned orientations while doing little to understand the motivation and reasoning that informs a teacher's choice of art activities. Recognizing the persistence of school art over time, a number of art educators (Chalmers, 1979; Clark, 1986; Eisner, 1984; Efland, 1976, 1979; Greer, 1984) call for closer examination of what is involved in converting knowledge into an art classroom event. There appears to be a lack of awareness of the contingencies present whenever presuppositions about the teaching and learning of art are transformed into classroom practice. One way of gaining insight into the transformation of theory into classroom practice that would lend in-sight into the teaching and learning of art in the classroom is to expand our frame of refer-ence to include aspects of the art teaching task not ordinarily given close examination. Time, space, personnel, material, authority, responsibility, rewards and punishment (Johnson & Brooks, 1979) are cited as features that need to be given attention in the context of studying classroom instruction. In addition, the research of a number of educators (Cornbleth, 1984; Doyle, 1979, 1982, 1984; Yinger, 1980) demonstrates the importance of extending the study of features given to describe classroom action and interaction to include strategies a teacher uses in making such features recognizable as locally approved ways of accomplishing the teaching and learning of art. The concern is not only with what teachers 5 know about the classroom but how they decide what is relevant on each occasion. Solving the problem of an orderly and routine course of events intended to give a sense of just an-other school day is a central task of teaching and rests on the strategies teachers use to manage it. In this view, the success of the art teaching task does not rest entirely on for-malized curricula, but on the recognition and management of a wide range of classroom features including knowledge of the subject to be taught. Doyle (1979) asserts that the nar-row focus of interest in research pertaining to teaching strategy has "trivialized problems posed by the environment in which teachers work" (p. 48). Studies of teacher effectiveness (Brophy, 1982; Cornbleth, 1984; Doyle, 1979, 1982, 1984; Yinger, 1980) indicate the need to study teacher action related to the constitution and management of the teaching task. In in-quiring about situationally defined features of the art teaching task described by teachers we are invited to ask about the strategies a teacher uses to make recognizable her or his work as representative of a locally approved way of doing art. There appears to be a need for a humanistic approach to research; one that recognizes a teacher's practical circumstances and the use of commonsense knowledge as a fundamental issue in bridging the gap between theory and practice; one that fosters our understanding of classroom interaction as it is presently conducted in the natural setting of an ordinary art classroom. Such a stance would attempt not to impose any new attitude on the teacher but remain open to understanding the art teaching task as it is socially constructed. The study being reported here adopts that position as an alternative way of viewing the art teaching task when it focuses on the teacher's problematic tendencies to see the world differently. In this regard, it can be assumed that teachers know the art teaching task as a set of advisings; that it is an orientation recognizable and discernible as locally ap-proved ways of getting the work done. Inasmuch as teachers feel sufficiently informed to carry out the art teaching task in a manner that is locally recognizable and acceptable, I shall refer to this work of accomplishment as the "orientation of the good teacher of 6 art."1 This study moves beyond the use of school art as a vehicle for indicating teacher per-formance in terms of art education orientations to ask how, in the context of the class-room, school art is constituted in the first place. That is, rather than denouncing copy work, coloring-in, time fillers, and tracing as obstacles to overcome, I am invited to explore the situated use of these activities as they assist teachers in negotiating the art teaching task toward a favorable outcome. This stance proposes that such organizational practices must be described and analyzed in order to provide an account of how a teacher produces art as a locally sanctioned course of action. Two important questions guide the work of this study; they are in effect the research questions: What are the features of the art teaching task known and used by teachers to orient to the elementary school; and how are conditions and considerations located and used by a teacher in the context of the classroom to inform this work? Schutz (1962) advocates the study of an individual's commonsense knowledge in everyday life that would provide a way of understanding the orientation of the good teacher of art. Garfinkel (1967) advises the study of commonsense knowledge as displays or accounts which a member of a setting gives to self and others. This view of everyday life offers a way of making recognizable the teaching and learning of art. Thus it is on commonsense knowledge that this study has focused. Scope of the Study Through a review of literature, two ways of reasoning which refer to a state of disjuncture in the field will be put forward. First, art education orientations and the re-search and associated scholarship are presented as having been less than successful in dis-closing to teachers in the field what is intentionally regarded as educationally relevant. Second, the school art style which appears to stand in opposition to what art education holds as relevant has been viewed as responsible for the lack of success of art education ^hen I speak of the "orientation of the good teacher of art," I am not necessarily endorsing this orientation. My charge is to describe the art teaching task as it is conventionally understood by teachers participating in the study. This stance was taken by Stoddart (1986, p. 105) who described how ethnographers know "the program of their craft as a set of advisings." 7 orientations. Recent studies point to the importance of studying classroom conditions that teachers must confront in transforming initial conceptions of art teaching and learning into practice. Art Education Orientations The fact that children make images which are recognizable as art and the mandate of formal education to provide for such an event is treated by art education as a matter of concern. Art educators are responsible for planning what happens in elementary school classrooms and for control over what goes on while it is happening. In other words, aspects of the teacher/student relationship are made recognizable as an art education event and are expected to be approved as such in the context of schooling. Historically, the phenomena of art, child art, and child/adult interaction (Efland, 1985) has led to a presupposition that art teaching and learning need to be brought under institutional control by a group legislated to establish its relevance and see that it is carried out. Institutional control and consequent obligations to produce a requirement of teachers to comply with standard social expectations can be viewed in this case as binding. Recognition of art education as one of society's relevant structures is embodied in such documents as professional journals, curriculum guides, programs of studies, and text-books on teacher training. Thus the nature of the child/adult experience in the art classroom is given a sense of order which in fact stands in place of the reality of the child's impetus to express on his or her own. The experience thus formalized serves as a point of reference for those concerned with teacher education. It thus establishes norms for anyone involved in teacher education. This normative view of teaching in its various documented forms presup-poses the need for a set of facilitating mechanisms underscoring the assumption that teachers can be brought to adopt a model which in fact idealizes teacher /student interaction. As Wilson says: Interaction in a given situation, then, is explained by first identifying structures of role expectations and complexes of dispositions, and then showing that the relevant features of the observed interaction can be deduced from these expec-tations and dispositions along with the assumptions embodied in the model of the actor. (1970, p. 699) 8 Thus teachers of art come to be viewed as being in compliance or noncompliance with standard requirements. In the United States, art educators officially support a policy stated by the National Art Education Association Professional Standards Committee. The 1977 Report of the Na-tional Art Education Association Commission summarized guidelines for teacher preparation as follows: Their professional training should include specialized study of the content of art appreciation, art history, aesthetics, and art criticism; and of the basic concepts and skills related to processes, organizational structure, technical aspects, and expressive content of the making of art. Their training should also include ex-tended work in at least one studio and/or art appreciation area. For perspective and flexibility in their teaching field and allied fields art teachers also need sup-plementary training in the following areas: knowledge and appreciation of re-lated arts disciplines such as dance, drama, music, and literature; history of art education; technological knowledge in areas related to the visual arts; research in art, art education, and the psychology of art; and knowledge of the relevance of art to life and to vocational possibilities, philosophy (particularly aesthetics), and curriculum design and construction, (p. 47) These expectations typify art education and organize the field into categories of people, be-haviors and reasons for behaving in a certain manner. Such an orientation implies an expec-tation to teach and do art in a designated way. There is the premise that prospective members can be brought to adopt and share a stock of knowledge deemed relevant as art education. The Report of the National Art Education Association Commission on Art Edu-cation (1977) further advocates that: These teachers should also have participated in student teaching or have demon-strated their teaching ability in some other direct work with children at the ele-mentary level. They should be imaginative. They should demonstrate personal creativity and professional competence as artists and thus be capable of fulfill-ing the role of the artist/teacher in the classroom. They should also have a broadly based knowledge of how the arts affect the local community and the society, and an awareness of how they as teachers can contribute to the cultural climate. Finally, art teachers at the elementary level should be able to meet the certification requirements of the particular state in which they teach, and be expected to study beyond the baccalaureate level to advance toward full profes-sional competence, (p. 47) What is the foundational work done by art education that leads to and informs the afore-mentioned directives describing the teacher's role? Art education research and scholarship has taken place in a university environment that values and promotes the investigation of methods and concepts in conjunction with 9 work in a number of related fields, primarily psychology, anthropology, education and phi-losophy (Rush, 1984). The use of viewpoints taken from related fields has given art educa-tion a diverse range of aims and rationales for teaching art in the elementary school. These orientations have been described by a number of art educators (Efland, 1979; Eisner, 1984; Lanier, 1984; Chapman, 1979a) as providing models of teacher performance: Mimetic; teaching provides students with models to imitate Pragmatic; teaching provides students with problems to give structure to experience Expressive: teaching nurtures and shelters natural expression Objective; teaching fosters perceptual awareness of what is real and known. Research and curriculum development in art education has attempted to focus on a child-centered orientation and discipline-centered orientation as hybrids of the four theoretical stances cited. This result, it is believed, grounds beliefs in well reasoned and evidentially based arguments. The teaching task is expected to be guided by such orientations as preunderstandings or resources for decision making. Yet as if in bold disdain of these orientations and the research and scholarship gener-ated from them, school art appears to resist reform and stand in opposition to what is be-lieved to be true about how art should be taught. In responding to this state of affairs, a number of art educators (Barzun, 1978; Eisner, 1982, 1984; Greer, 1984; LaChappelle, 1983; Lanier, 1980; Nadaner, 1983) argue that art education is preoccupied with finding a single purpose to which it can subscribe. Lanier (1980) says: The history of purposes in art education is one of its least impressive chapters. We have changed our avowed purposes every few years, somewhat like a cha-meleon changing its skin color, and probably for the same reason, (p. 16) Barzun (1978) believes that this "chaos and confusion" (p. 5) in seeking out the one pur-pose for art education has misled art educators into a preoccupation with formulating and overrefining the foundational base as a way of achieving consensus. We suspend common sense and fly to metaphors and abstractions to cover the genuine things that we can do, that we could do, if we were not addicted to educational gaff. If you doubt my word, read your top heavy curriculum plan, your twelve objectives and your twenty-three guidelines, and bring to mind the dozens and scores of highfalutin slogans with which our profession has gargled during the last two generations, swinging this way and that between equally un-real panaceas, now all gone with the wind of which they were made. (p. 5) 10 As Mannheim (1952) says in discussing the systematization of experience, "life has the constant tendency to ossify itself into a system" (p. 89). The construction of ordinary forms of social phenomena observable in familiar institutional features of art, leisure, poli-tics, work and the like become a product of the reporting procedures of members of various organizations involved in these tasks. One result of this is that art orientations that express the belief systems of art education have a propensity to create and sustain a polarization of one group, the in-group, against another, the out-group, when the mandates of the former are used as a basis for prescribing to and assessing the latter. LaChappelle (1982), in discussing the emergence of art education as an intellectual activity and the institutionalization of that activity within a contemporary system of higher education, says: Further, it is helped to view a discipline not only as an area of intellectual in-quiry, but also as a type of social organization that has evolved to facilitate the different aspects of work involved in that inquiry. With the onset of institutionalization existing roles and values can be displaced or diminished and growth in other areas limited as the institutionalized entity manipulates the en-vironment to facilitate its work and increase its scope of activities, (p. 58) Preoccupation with art education as an intellectual activity as suggested above might mean that ideas formulated to inform practice will not be interpreted by teachers in terms of the intended meaning. Smith (1973) signifies that organizations fail to transcend the gap be-tween its practices and the school when what it does is removed from the everyday context of the school. The categories, coding procedures, and conceptual order sanctioned for use in the context of formal organization are a linguistic and methodological specifica-tion of organizational (or professional) structures of relevance. The "objects," "environment," "persons," "states of affairs," and "events," which are thus given reportable status are themselves constructed in the everyday organizational practices which realize the enterprise, (p. 265) Lanier (1984), discussing the effectiveness of what we have been able to do in art education, cautions that the ordering and interfacing of complex bodies of knowledge for instructional purposes may, to some extent, be artificial. He reasons that while the practice may have theoretical applicability, we need to be able to consider its overall instructional applicability. He further observes that "so-called teacher-proof curricula described in text-books, published by agencies of the governmental education establishment, and even sold 11 commercially" (p. 247) are hardly enough for the teacher to initiate confident decision-making. The following review of literature addresses the view that art education research and scholarship have not been successful in assuring that its theoretical assumptions are translated into classroom practice. This view will be represented in discussions of both the child-centered and the discipline-centered orientation. A Child-Centered Art Education Orientation Although interest in a child-centered orientation is purported to have waned in the early 'sixties, there is evidence that it continues to be a major teaching orientation. As Bullough and Goldstein (1984) observe, "The case for art as legitimate content and for art instruction has long rested upon a general recognition that children love to draw and colour and the doing has been its own end" (p. 144). For more than 20 years attempts have been made to shift away from reliance on the conception of the child as self-styled artist (Greer, 1984), yet it is still prevalent today. It is noteworthy that Creative and Mental Growth (1947), Lowenfeld's major book, is still one of the best selling textbooks in art education. Apparently, many teachers in our schools believe that art education for the development of creative and mental growth is still of central importance. (Eisner, 1984, p. 260) Freedom of creative expression in a child-centered orientation posits that a teacher should use a method of noninterference and restraint. And while Lowenfeld and Brittain (1982, 7th ed.) advise that each child's art work should be recognized no matter what convictions the teacher holds about its quality, they say, "Important aspects of developing children's creative thinking are encouraging each member to participate, withholding judgment, stimulating and rewarding unusual thinking, and promoting the seeing of relationships between ideas as they grow into one another" (p. 85). They invite the teacher to attempt to extend a child's frame of reference in order to overcome stereotyped symbols developed by the child (which would include interpreta-tion, adjustments, his or her own repeated symbols). How is a teacher to draw the line be-tween the adult recognition that some art is innate to the child's development whereas other 12 art is stereotyped? The authors advocate that children be encouraged to make choices free of teacher intervention. A teacher who wants to foster individual expression in the classroom, who wants to encourage initiative and spontaneity, and who wants to have children motivated to produce freely, will have to accept creative behavior. We wish to encourage the child to be full of curiosity, to poke fun at himself and others, to have original ideas of his own, even to question the teachers's direction, and at the same time we discourage children from feeling withdrawn, quiet, retiring, and dependent upon the teacher for directions and approval. (Lowenfeld & Brittain, 1982, p. 134) Lowenfeld and Brittain in Creative and Mental Growth (1982, 7th edition) insist that the teacher should not force his or her particular form of expression on the child. On the surface this appears a defensible method, but it is not clear how an individual can remain uninfluential in a situation such as a classroom setting where myriad conditions and consid-erations demand attention and have to be addressed in sustaining a sense of order. When placed in the context of the classroom, the above proposal for the teaching of art appears inconsistent. That is, it lauds freedom of creative expression while ignoring the school as an institution that has historically valued compliance with authority. DeFrancesco (1958, p. 135) says that "the creative development of children requires careful stimulation and sound motivation at almost every step. It could be argued, then, that any type of adult guidance or interference with free expression automatically nullifies the very heart of the method and renders it not as free as it claims." Wilson (1977) con-cludes that even while there is advocacy of freedom of expression, there remains the subtle encouragement for teachers to motivate children to produce adult conceptions of what children's art should look like. Preoccupation with a conception of child art in develop-mental stages has tended to obscure and even suppress the explorative nature of children's activities and the wealth of representational symbols invented by them. In their observations of children doing art Wilson and Wilson (1979) observe that children's art is decidedly more varied than what is presented in theories of artistic growth in developmental stages wherein the focus is on a limited range of graphic detail and subject matter. A difference seems to exist between schemata described in theories of creative growth in developmental stages and what children do in actuality, in that the former views children's art as having a uniformity 13 of appearance that is context independent. Children's art as it is represented in develop-mental stages is given as dealing exclusively with similarities in children's work (Allison, 1980) delimiting teacher expection. What Lowenfeld was unable to account for in providing teachers with a graphic account of children's art in developmental stages is the element of effect in his conception of structure. When children's art expression is represented as un-folding in developmental stages, the graphic account is open for misuse. In the art education textbook, Children and their Art, (1970, 2nd edition) Gaitskell and Hurwitz advocate freedom of creative expression for the child and are critical of methods of teaching which enforce particular formulas for expression. At the same time the authors prescribe the teaching of contour-line drawing as an accepted method for portraying what one sees in outline form. The authors do not explain the contradiction between the in-vitation to do contour drawing and advocacy of freedom of creative expression. The advocacy of a child-centered orientation has tended to be loosely coupled and only suggestive of what it would take to implement it. Left to the teacher to interpret, the orientation that was intentionally meant one way in the context of art education could be seen differently in the context of the classroom. A Discipline-Centered Art Education Orientation Discipline-centered art education with its advocacy of formal instruction typifies a method of art teaching and learning wherein the teacher's role is seen as shaping the basic beliefs of children in terms of clearly defined and socially organized knowledge. Inquiry in the classroom is modeled after what art educators conceive to be the professional techniques of disciplined inquiry of the artist, critic, historian, and aesthetician (Greer, 1984). The idea is to convince teachers of the importance of art instruction by presenting knowledge for use in organized and formally patterned sequences of concepts and skills. A discipline-based art curriculum has three major attributes; (a) its emphasis on art, and (b) the skills necessary to practice art, (c) presented in a struc-tured way. A discipline-based art curriculum is made up of activities derived from the disciplines of aesthetics, studio practice, art criticism, and art history. (Greer, 1984, p. 215) 14 Knowledge of this orientation is organized and sequenced horizontally across grade levels from simple to complex with some consideration of the level of student maturation. It was in 1965 that the advent of a discipline-centered art education orientation began to take form (Efland, 1984). The Seminar in Art Education for Research and Curriculum Development at Pennsylvania State University established a theoretical ground that influ-enced a number of major curriculum projects (the "Penn State Seminar"). Clark (1984), in critiquing the effectiveness of a number of these projects in respect to their relevance in upholding the expectations of a discipline-centered approach, felt that it was important to know if the projects had indeed articulated a curriculum with a content worthy of study; could they be understood and used by teachers with success? His conclusion was that curric-ulum projects following the Pennsylvania State Seminar experienced difficulty in the translation of theory into practice. Five projects were examined: Guidelines for Art Instruction Through Television for the Elementary Schools; Art: Meaning, Methods, and Media; The Stanford-Kettering Project; SWRL: The Southwest Regional Laboratory for Educational Research and Development; and The Aesthetic Eye Project. Only Art: Meaning, Methods, and Media remains "relatively widely disseminated" (p. 227) in Clark's view. He observes that the success of Art: Meaning, Methods, and Media can be attributed to the content of the projects which stresses practical classroom activities such as "perceiving, producing, and learning to use art tools" (p. 227). For the remaining projects studied, Clark says that at present little use is made of them by schools. Criticism leveled at the projects by those involved in implementing them stress an overprescribed structure coupled with a lack of clarity of purpose and conceptual meaning to guide the transition from theory into practice. These were thought to be more or less practical concerns of teachers centered around how and why to use the materials. Reflecting on why curriculum projects arising out of the work of the Penn State Seminar have not proven to be successful in a wide range of educational settings, Chapman (1985) concludes that "an awareness of the audiences for the curriculum and the criteria they may employ in assessing the product" (p. 210) cannot be ignored in creating future 15 curriculum models. This would seem to suggest the need to pay more attention to how in reality curricula are made operational in the art classroom. However, a recent undertaking of a discipline-centered art education orientation as a stance for curriculum development by the J . Paul Getty Trust, Center for Education in Arts gives no indication that the role of the teacher in the everyday context of the classroom will be given increased attention as a critical element in bringing about desired curriculum outcomes. Greer, Director of the Center for Education in the Arts locates (1984) a number of distinguishing features of a discipline approach. These include systematically and sequen-tially organized knowledge of art as an intrinsically valued pursuit drawn from studio prac-tice, art criticism, art history, and aesthetics. No mention is made of the teacher's role as an element tangential to the successful implementation of the curriculum outcomes. Similarly, the perceived need for systematic and coordinated curriculum development resulted in the project of the Central Midwestern Regional Educational Laboratory ( C E M R E L ) in 1967 in the United States. The program was developed in two distinct phases. Phase I was intended to deal with the conceptual problems of curriculum develop-ment for aesthetic education and undertook the formulation of a defensible foundational base out of which instructional materials could be designed and tested. Phase II was respon-sible for the design and testing of units of instruction for adoption in schools. In Phase I Guidelines: Curriculum Development for Aesthetic Education (Barkan, Chapman & Kern, 1970) was developed as a foundational base meant to provide guidance for curriculum writers designing instructional materials in Phase II. Kern (1984), who as-sisted in the development of Phase I, described the materials as being of three kinds: (a) theoretical and practical instructions for developing curriculum materials; (b) a compi-lation of the major concepts operative in the various arts as well as the general areas of philosophy, aesthetics, and education; and (c) descriptions of typical student activities that might be encouraged in a program of aesthetic education. Kern (1984) declares that he knows of no aesthetic education program that continues to use C E M R E L . He comments that, "a major curriculum reform in arts education did not occur" following the Penn State 16 Seminar and that, "Today teachers in the arts are still teaching much the same content for the same purposes as they did prior to the introduction of aesthetic education" (p. 233). Why was the reform not achieved? Geahighan (1976) and Kern (1984) suggest that there was disparity of expectation among groups involved in C E M R E L . Although members of Phase I and Phase II consulted with each other, the members of Phase II (who were expected to design and make instruc-tional material available to teachers) did not feel that they were intimately associated with the writings of the Guidelines. For example, Geahighan (1976) found that passages taken from the writings of Morris Weitz and Monroe Beardsley in art criticism and offered as a way of understanding the term Art criticism became incomprehensible when separated from their original context. Geahighan observes that each of the passages deals with art criticism; yet there is a difference in the content and the method of presentation that challenges the presumed fixity of meaning of art. Although the original intent of the guidelines was to assist curriculum writers in de-signing instructional materials, they appeared in reality to be more of a prescription of con-tent and method in light of an assumed understanding of an acceptable education ideal. That is, those who designed the guidelines appear to believe they and their target audiences shared common understanding. As a series of rule-guided movements in a game, the planner at Phase II is invited to organize predetermined components, goals, content, and method into a recognizable and approved functional whole. What could be done in art was approved only insofar as it brought about the projected state of affairs. It is not clear how teachers twice removed from the context in which the original intentions were formulated would adapt to the guidelines. Jagodzinski and Palmer (1984) examined a draft of the new Art Curriculum Guide of the Province of Alberta. The authors state that the foundational assumptions underlying statements in the guide appear to follow a discipline-based orientation conceptualizing four major skills. This art process is articulated in four major skills as development of perceptual awareness, knowledge of art principles, self-expression of personal values, and 17 appreciation of art. These four skill areas have been defined as depiction, ex-pression, composition, and reflection, (p. 10) The authors go on to express a concern that the "skeletal" (p. 10) representation of what is a complex aesthetic content does not offer much guidance to the general classroom teacher left to interpret its content. Bullough and Goldstein (1984) say that the arts are under increasing pressure to jus-tify their social utility within the context of what is relevant and worthwhile. This has re-sulted in an increased attempt to legitimate art by focusing on concepts and skills systematically and sequentially organized as a foundational knowledge base informing in-struction. In exploring the problem of how legitimacy is established on these grounds, the authors studied a curriculum entitled Art is Elementary developed in the state of Utah in the United States and published in 1976. Bullough and Goldstein observed and interviewed classroom teachers using the curriculum guide. Developers responsible for its design were in-terviewed. Bullough and Goldstein posit that the curriculum developers set out with the in-tention of formulating the traditional knowledge base of art education in a program consistent with preferred curriculum practices across all school subjects. The assumption was that any concept on art could be analyzed into its constituent parts for the guide and then later reassembled by the classroom teacher without loss of original intention. In this sense art could be taught and learned like any other school subject, giving it a position of legiti-macy as part of the curriculum. The rationale guiding the way concepts and skills are ordered and sequenced in these materials assumes the importance of a developmental order and a content hierarchically ordered from simple to complex. Presenting the concepts in sequence at a developmental stage or time appropriate for learning is posited as essential for teaching success. As Bullough and Goldstein point out, no reason is given to teachers that would explain why art has to be structured this way. It must be shown by those making this claim that the sequence is, for instance, precisely coordinated with developmental facts or that there are some other compelling reasons to assert that "learning will not take place if the instruction is out of sequence." Unfortunately, AIE contains no such demonstration, leav-ing the sequence essentially a matter of preference and common sense, (p. 148) 18 The guide also leaves unexplained an assumption regarding the relationship between readi-ness and knowledge. Lanier (1984) cautions curriculum developers against taken for granted assumptions about how knowledge of art should be ordered. One significant issue that might be examined with profit is the differentiation that might be made between those sequences of content in some way inherent in some aspect of art, and others of an artificial or imposed nature, which are superimposed upon the body of art for pedagogical purposes, (p. 234) There appears to be a need not only to look at and bring to question the manner in which art educators impose order on phenomena of art and child art development, but in addition a need to ask about the kind of adjustive effort a teacher makes in adapting orientations to classroom practice. What is the knowledge base that a teacher uses as a reference point for doing art in the classroom, and what strategies does she or he use to justify its use? Bullough and Goldstein also bring to question the use of language in art curricula such as that encountered in Art is Elementary. The term concept used in the guide is de-scribed as being of two kinds: awareness and skill. Bullough and Goldstein feel that the use of the term "awareness concepts" gave a sense of importance to an activity that was essen-tially "skil l" oriented, (p. 149) That is most awareness concepts seem to be concerned with getting the student to develop a disposition to recognize, for example, that "dark values seem optically 'heavier' than light values" (Activity 96) where the instructional inten-tion is to facilitate the development of a particular skill as, for instance, "The student uses a variety of washes in painting with waterbase media (Activity 128). (p. 149) The authors declare that vagueness associated with the use of the term concept results in confusion about the content and purposes of art teaching and learning. They wonder if Activity 96 is truly intended to explore the concepts "dark values" and "light values" or if the general statement is indeed a skill concept in disguise reducing disciplined inquiry to doing. The authors questioned the emphasis placed on this kind of doing where little dis-tinction becomes evident between Activity 96 and Activity 128. In presenting systematic criteria for evaluating learning in art education, Wilson (1971) describes perception, knowledge, comprehension, analysis, evaluation, appreciation and production as categories typically used to explicate the methods and practices of art 19 education. He posits that some of these terms have been taken to have a variety of meanings. Although he admits that key terms in art education are often ambiguous, there is the expectation that a model will somehow be followed in a systematic and rational way. He realizes that the meaning of such terms could be different for him than for someone else. It is the somehow that is problematic, since a discipline-centered orientation presupposes that teachers using a system of interpretive procedures will arrive at the same understanding as the author intended. Similarly, Detmers (1980), working on a conceptual model for art curriculum plan-ning, observes that most curriculum schemes do not adapt well to the visual arts because "verbal bias" inherent in the discipline obstructs understanding. He goes on to present a model for curriculum design. After identifying five different types of content as philosophi-cal, structural, formative, historical and relational, Detmers cross-references them with hierarchically ordered conceptions of knowing and learning. Content in art is cross-refer-enced with procedural knowing, nonbasic knowing, and basic knowing as dimensions of ways to learn. As well, Detmers provides a general planning procedure, "Identification and statement of the problem, definition and delimitation of the problem, data gathering, analy-sis and interpretation of data, proposal of alternatives, analysis of alternatives, proposal of the plan, implementation of the plan, gathering, evaluation of data and evaluation" (p. 63). The author admits that the model is not very useful in identifying and delimiting specific problem-solving exercises and that indeed it is possible to use the model "without regard for the planning procedures suggested" (p. 65). In not specifying how the instructional act will be accomplished in maintaining this stance, he assumes that his commonsense understanding of "the range of possible interactions" (p. 63) is shared by the teacher trying to use the model. In addition, Detmers observes that differentiating "innovative knowing" from "crea-tive knowing" (p. 62) is troublesome. This is evident when he describes innovative knowing as "the transfer of ways of doing from one activity to another" and creative knowing as an act that "requires transformation, a modification of ways of doing to produce different kinds of doing" (p. 62). It appears that the lack of clarity of purpose and procedure which 20 Detmers finds evident in other curriculum schemes is stubbornly present in his proposed curriculum model. As with the authors of Art is Elementary, Detmers assumes that a good teacher of art acts in a deliberate and calculated manner guided by an understanding of an ideal model in choosing from a range of possible alternatives. This is evident in his invitation to only the "seasoned" teacher to use "common-sense" in using the model (p. 57). Few of the curricula developed as a result of the Penn State Seminar are in use as originally intended. The original thrust of the discipline-centered art education orientation has not been clearly understood in the field. Several art educators claim that texts intended to guide the classroom teacher toward a deliberate and calculated way of teaching art have offered an insubstantial rendering of the original knowledge bases. The reasoning is that those who design and write about art teaching and learning assume that what they have in-tended is what will be understood and acted upon in the classroom. Lack of awareness of the audience for whom the curricula are intended has resulted in a deficiency in clarity of purpose and conceptual meaning in making the orientation operational. In conclusion, it has been argued that the reasons behind the advocacy of either a child-centered or a discipline-centered orientation which were intended to provide the class-room teacher with purposeful sets of guidelines for teaching have not been clearly conveyed. Knowledge of the teacher as nurturer has not communicated a model of the requisite art teacher/student relationship and methods for its achievement. Several art educators having examined research and writing which supports a discipline-centered orientation, agree that it has not been successful in guiding teaching. The fact that present orientations are found to be less than successful in bringing about curriculum change in the classroom, calls for fur-ther examination of the strategies that teachers use in the teaching of art. In the remaining part of the present chapter the viewpoints of several educators, in-cluding those concerned specifically with art, will be put forward. These express a need to closely examine conditions and considerations which bear on how the art teaching task is constituted in the classroom. 21 The School Art Style as an Orientation Disjuncture between what is presented as art education and what appears to go on in elementary schools as school art occurs when the conceptual structures into which ideas about the teaching and learning of art have been pressed do not correspond with what transpires in actuality in the field. Whereas in my earlier discussion the cause of disjuncture was located as a failure to project original intentions, here it is argued that school art is an obstacle, an opposing system of relevance, if you will, which stands in opposition to the art education orientations. Macklin (1978) makes the observation that art done in the public schools is the poor relation of a developed art education profession. Consider the statement of Degge (1979), an art educator, who describes the teaching and doing of art at the ele-mentary grade level as follows: What has come to be known as art at the elementary level is represented by the various and often craft-related projects and their resultant products. Elementary teachers apparently believe this is what art for youngsters is supposed to be. We understand how they might have arrived at this belief, not only because their resource books support such notions, but also due to their own past experiences as students making projects in elementary school as well as the teachers they observed during their training, (p. 170) The idea of "craft-related projects" suggests an oversimplified and inferior undertaking. Here it would seem that what can be visually inspected as the school art product does not measure up to versions of child art illustrated in textbooks on art education. Chapman (1982) speaks of the miseducation of children by teachers who make use of a folk knowledge counterproductive to the ideals of art education: However, instead of working on skills that produce competence and authentic-ally bolster the child's self-confidence, we typically offer children in the upper elementary grades a steady flow of art projects that guarantee artlike effects with a minimum of skill and effort. Examples? Place chips of wax crayon be-tween pieces of wax paper, iron the paper flat, and display the result in a win-dow as a "stained glass design." Pour plaster into a plastic sandwich bag, hold with two hands until it hardens, remove the bag, and paint "a design" on the abstract form. These and other manipulative activities may be justified by say-ing that they encourage experimentation and develop openmindedness towards art. But what we are really teaching children through such activities is that art is easy, fun, undemanding, and instantly possible if you call it an "experiment" or a "design." This fundamental miseducation of children is not simply per-mitted in schools; it is often taken as good and sufficient art education, (p. 57) 22 Mittler (1976), in advising the National Art Education Association of the United States on structuring instruction in art fundamentals for the elementary school, says: Too many so-called art programs devoid of carefully selected content or struc-tured sequence look as if the teacher purchased a book of arts and crafts activ-ities and initiated the school year on page one and ended it on page 58. (p. 13) Processes through which children are led in the making of school art are seen as not con-forming to versions prescribed by art educators. The Canadian Society for Education Through Art, in a policy statement regarding art competitions for children (1961), makes the statement that "Teachers will continue to cause harm, not only to the art program, but also to the general educational program of the children" [original emphasis] if they continue to be permitted to buy and use commerically prepared and packaged kits and books that perpetuate noncreative activities in the classrooms (1961, p. 6). Some of the arguments put forward to discourage the use of resources "that are not art books" (1961) appear as fol-lows: 1. To copy, trace or " f i l l - in" pictures denies a child the opportunity to think, solve problems, and to develop his individual abilities. 2. To have children use these adult-prepared devices imitatively, gives the children standards inconsistent with their levels of development and thus tends to impair their sense of security. 3. When children use these commercially prepared devices, because they are confronted with no meaningful problems, they experience no worthwhile positive learning. 4. Copy-work, colouring and the following of step-by-step directions do not provide creative work necessary for the development of the imagination. 5. Children reveal their reactions to experience in their art, but are pre-vented from so doing when confronted with these commercial devices. Thus the whole process of art is restricted through their use, while the teacher loses an invaluable opportunity of understanding children through their artistic expressions. 6. The skills developed through such activities as colouring, copying and tracing are mechanical and divorced from thinking. Hence, these skills are useless to the child. The only worthwhile skills are those which the chil-dren develop in close connection with their purposeful creative activities. 7. Most of the commercially prepared devices are so badly delineated and designed that they degrade the children's artistic taste, (p. 6) School art thus is regarded as inconsistent with what art education should be. It may be that the usefulness of the concept school art and the school art style as a vehicle for criticism has depended too much on a degree of vagueness as evidenced in the aforementioned comments on it. Perhaps the notion of school art labels more than it 23 explains. The mere acknowledgement of its presence does not seem to be enough to bring it under control. Rather, the label school art is used to create the sense of a social force de-liberately operating in opposition to art education orientations. In actuality very little is known about what motivates its presence in the first place. Tracing, coloring-in and copying as instances of the school art style are judged principally as variations that depart from art education ideals rather than as unexplained phenomena. Perhaps school art has a variety of situated uses not recognizable by art education. Recognizing the ubiquitous nature of the school art style and postulating that it represents an orientation acquired in the process of schooling, several educators (Chalmers, 1979; Chapman, 1979a, 1979b; Eisner, 1984; Greer, 1984) call for closer examination of what goes on in the classroom. Rush and Conant (1979, p. 9) say, "Perhaps it is not so much that teachers don't understand the arts as it is a difficulty of fitting conceptions of the arts to the existing context of the schools." Becher and Maclure (1978) describe the locus of the problem as a form of break between the factors of what constitutes public curriculum designed outside the school and the grounds shaping actual classroom practice. The authors elaborate: There is in fact a gap between the public curriculum and the actual regime under which children live and learn at school . . . Under no educational system can the professional relationship between teacher and child be wholly con-strained by a predetermined set of propositions laid down in advance by an outside authority, (p. 18) Implied here is the notion of the teacher as negotiator in the everyday life of the classroom. Perhaps in our zest to make exhibitable and enforceable a standardized art education prac-tice we have overlooked the practical circumstances of a teacher and the adjustive effort re-quired to get art done in the school. Smith (1973) says that perhaps we are wrong-minded in believing that a knowledge base claiming to standardize role expectations can remain unaffected by local conditions and that variation in expected action is necessarily deviant or noncompliant: It is a view of knowledge which holds that to be properly a knowledge it must somehow transcend the social contexts to which the knower is necessarily bound. The impediment is seen in the social detritus that the knower trails along with her into the relation of knower and known, and which thus contam-inates the knowledge it produces, (p. 265) 24 What might we expect to learn by turning attention to the practical circumstances of the classroom teacher? What a teacher does in art is embedded in a wider social structure spanning a com-plex of interacting social roles, each of which expects of her or him a standard of good educational practice. Sharp and Green (1975) describe the constraints teachers seem to expe-rience as they work in the education community: Similarly she will be required to live up to certain standards of "good pedagogic practice" set within the wider community of professional colleagues and more crucially by those who are in a position of power over her within the school it-self. In addition parents and colleagues will look to her to maintain social order in the classroom. Moreover, her pupils are not merely passive "objects" but will exert some influence on the teacher, (p. 116) Implicit in the statement is the notion that a teacher of art is required to manage a multiplicity of conditions and considerations which are not always taken into account in prescriptions to teach. Johnson and Brooks (1979), in locating factors that contribute to the nature of in-struction, posit that the value placed on features such as time, space, personnel, material, authority, responsibility, rewards and punishment can provide us with insight into the meaning of teaching and learning in the classroom environment. Extrapolating from this there is a need to describe the art teaching task and the stock of knowledge to which a teacher refers in explicating classroom practice. There is a need to ask what strategies are used by teachers in formulating a conception of the art teaching task. A number of studies cited below are useful in making reference to the interpretive work done by a teacher in making action in art recognizable and approved as the teaching and learning of art. Yinger (1980) made a detailed study of the planning decisions of one elementary school teacher during a five month period. Two central characteristics of the teacher's plan-ning and instruction emerged during the study. First, the teaching task manifest as action and interaction has the following features that elaborate the classroom context: "definite temporal and spatial boundaries; a physical milieu with props—books, pencils and other ma-terials; a standing pattern of behavior; and interaction between the physical components and the standing pattern of behavior" (p. 111). The second distinctive characteristic of the 25 teaching task is the way a teacher establishes routine and order. Simplified management of instruction and activity and planning routines become mechanisms that increase predictability and reduce the complexity of the classroom environment for the teacher. Yinger calls for continued study of the intricate practical skills and wisdom that the teacher as practitioner uses in making sense of classroom activities. Brophy (1982) reports on research conducted at the Institute for Research in Teaching (IRT) at Michigan State University concerned with how teachers determine which content they will teach. He describes the reductions and distortions introduced into the intended cur-riculum in the process of attempting to make it manageable in the context of the classroom. Analysis of widely used fourth grade mathematics curricula and tests revealed that although there was a core of common content included in all or at least most of the three curricula and five tests examined, in actuality there was great variation across curricula in terms of what was finally implemented. The studies conducted provide comprehensive information re-garding factors influencing classroom practice such as lack of experience, educational back-ground and preparation time in making practical use of curriculum materials. The effects of these conditions result in distortion and reduction of curricula in order to maintain a stand-ard of classroom management and order. The teacher is viewed as having to make an adjustive effort in order to make the curriculum materials manageable in the context of the classroom. Emmer, Evertson, and Anderson (1980) studied classroom processes at the beginning of the school year. Twenty-seven third grade teachers participated in an observational study. Frequency counts of behavior, ratings and narrative descriptions were used throughout the school year to identify two groups of teachers who were different in management effective-ness. The authors conclude that the group of teachers described as "better managers" (p. 227) were distinguished by their effective use of classroom rules and procedures, moni-toring of students and delivery of consequences. Less effective management was often a function of a less than efficient system for organizing procedures, and rules for negotiating this system with students. 26 Cornbleth (1984) recognizes the complexity of phenomena operating in the classroom but adds that by labeling it "hidden curriculum" (p. 29) we have merely given the appear-ance of accounting for its presence much the same as we have done with school art. She calls for attention to aspects of schooling that are only vaguely understood and remain unexamined, such as pedagogical, institutional, and social environments and how teachers manage interrelations in them. The emphasis placed on a study of the interrelationship of features identified by teachers advances our understanding of classroom practice. This suggests a need to understand the commonsense manner in which a teacher manages condi-tions arising in the school setting. Cornbleth says that "implicit curricula" consist of mes-sages imparted by the classroom and school environment which "complement, contradict, or parallel the formal, manifest curriculum of reading, writing, mathematics, science, social studies, and other subjects" (p. 30). The teacher's role is one of mediator in the classroom; that is, through interpretive procedures a teacher is able to negotiate order and make sense of experience. Among the contradictions of contemporary schooling are discrepancies within and between curriculum and context, discontinuities among the messages of schooling and other social agencies, and the paradox of the school's role in af-fording both liberating opportunities and constraints on personal autonomy, (p. 31) Cornbleth cautions that we must avoid the temptation to examine curricula and context sep-arate from each other. The author appears to be reminding us of the normative complexity in the process of schooling wherein a teacher is found managing a broad range of classroom contingencies recognized as being congruent or noncongruent with the art teaching task. McKay (1971) examined the teacher's perspective and found that a teacher's ways of making sense of a situation involve a process of locking in a conception of the teaching task that gives meaning to and defines the act. Upon closer analysis of a teacher's situation, two things become apparent. The outcome of the teaching task is contingent on many things that happen in the school, and making sense of a situation is done to lock in, or make comprehensible for practical purposes, the features of the situation. McKay concludes that understanding a person's sense-making process is not a simple matter of revealing a 27 correspondence between the situation and a set of apparent expectations such as those given in art education. Doyle (1984) calls for an examination of classroom management as action teachers take to solve the problem of order in the classroom. He argues that solving its problem is a central task of teaching, one which rests primarily on the strategies (arrangement of people and space) a teacher is found to use. In this view the success of the art teaching task does not rest entirely in formalized curricula, but on the recognition and management of a wide range of classroom features, including but not restricted to knowledge of the subject, brought to bear on the task. To suggest that teachers view their task simply as "maximizing learning outcomes" (p. 48) and that alternatives to choice can be implemented through the simple desire to do so is to overlook the complexity and force of the environment and a teacher's skill in managing it. Doyle's way of conceptualizing the teaching task is intended to include the many ways in which teachers recognize and process demands made on them in the classroom environment. The researcher is invited to seek to understand the knowledge teachers use to guide the art teaching task. Extrapolating from the studies reviewed, it seems that a teacher's conception of the art teaching task is at one with a general classroom orientation wherein many conditions and considerations arise needing resolution. Art teaching strategy refers to the degree of ef-fectiveness that a teacher achieves in making her or his work recognizable as an approved way of managing circumstances. Summary An extensive amount of research and development in art education on the teaching and learning of art has focused on child-centered and discipline-centered orientations in the belief that art teachers can be prepared to teach art that will make a difference in the lives of children. Art educators lament the state of affairs of art education as it is undertaken in elementary school. They suggest that the teaching and learning of art bears little relationship to established art education orientations. A review of literature points out several reasons 28 why it has become difficult to implement art education orientations. First, assumptions underlying both the child-centered and the discipline-centered orientations appear to ignore what it takes to translate the meaning of such orientations into classroom practice. The child-centered art education orientation as it is represented in textbooks, journals, curriculum guides, and other reading matter has been found to be unclear in what it would take to make it operational. The orientation does not make it ob-vious how a teacher is to enforce a rule emphasizing noninterference when myriad condi-tions demand attention and have to be addressed in the classroom. It could be argued that any kind of teacher intervention interferes with the idealization of freedom of expression. Similarly, it has been argued that texts which claim to follow a discipline-centered art edu-cation orientation give evidence of an insubstantial rendering of the intended meaning and purpose deemed necessary to guide classroom practice. Those who design curricula and write about art teaching and learning assume that what they have intended is what will be under-stood and acted upon in the classroom. Whereas the aforementioned conditions that impede curriculum implementation were located within the process of disseminating curricula, another condition having to do with the school art style is viewed as standing in opposition to the orientations. Several educators point out that what transpires in the elementary school as art bears little resemblance to what are educators advocate. However, the mere acknowledgment of school art and the school art style in the elementary classroom has done little to explain how it can be held re-sponsible for the failure of art education orientations. There appears to be a need to extend our frame of reference to include features of the art teaching task which are only vaguely understood and remain essentially unexamined. Further to this, the recent work of a number of educators calls for closer scrutiny of the organizational structure of the classroom setting as a condition brought to bear on the art teaching task. Undertaking the teaching of art in the classroom setting while maintaining a sense of order is taken to be a central part of teaching and rests primarily on the strategies a teacher uses to bring it about in a locally approved way. By locating features of the art teaching task, the stock of knowledge that 29 informs it, and strategies teachers use to bring it about, we might begin to understand con-ditions that affect the art teaching task. In talking to teachers about the teaching of art, we begin to understand from their perspective those conditions in the classroom that comple-ment, contradict, or run congruent with a teacher's expectation as well as art education ex-pectations. The sense of disjuncture that appears to be present between art education orientations and the school art style will be addressed in the present study by attempting to make recog-nizable the teaching and learning of art from the perspective of elementary school teachers. What is needed is a stance that permits the recognition of a teacher's everyday situa-tion as a phenomenon of study in its own right, one that takes as a focus the interpretive work whereby the teaching of art is accomplished by a teacher. The study of an individual's commonsense knowledge in everyday life as pioneered by Schutz (1962) offers a way of viewing art teaching in this study. Commonsense knowledge will be treated as displays or accounts which a teacher gives to self and others making the teaching of art recognizable. This study will begin with a description of situationally defined features governing the art teaching task given by teachers and then ask how these teachers negotiate the meaning of these features. Two assumptions are made in this study regarding the teaching of elemen-tary school art: 1. That the art teaching task which orients the good teacher of art is open to under-standing in a routine way, and 2. That teachers in an elementary school setting are in a position to give descriptive ac-counts which reveal how the art teaching task is constituted. Through repeated visits to six elementary school classrooms with the purpose of ob-serving art teaching, and by means of intensive interviews with the six teachers involved, this study explores the orientation toward the teaching of art in elementary schools. It is limited by the decision to focus exclusively on the teaching task as one of a number of roles critical to the teaching and learning of art. 30 Purpose The purposes of this study are two: 1. To describe features of art teaching and the stock of knowledge basic to it as locally approved instances of the orientation of the good teacher of art, and 2. To describe the strategies used by the good teacher of art to make comprehensible to herself or himself and others work as an instance of locally approved ways of accom-plishing art in an elementary school classroom. This study is directed toward understanding the strategies used by teachers in making comprehensible art teaching in the context of an elementary classroom setting. It is accepted that understanding classroom practices in the teaching of art is a significant first step in es-tablishing a knowledge base that will permit formation of informed questions regarding cur-riculum implementation. Chapter II will focus on the work of Schutz (1962, 1986, 1970, 1973) and Garfinkel (1963, 1967) as it is brought to bear in understanding the art teaching task in six elemen-tary school classrooms. 31 CHAPTER II COMMONSENSE KNOWLEDGE: A GROUND FOR INQUIRY Introduction This chapter comprises of two parts which establish a theoretical ground from which questions for inquiry are later generated for use in examining how a teacher's commonsense knowledge in everyday life is used to construe what is relevant in teaching art. The ques-tions generated in the context of this theoretical framework are elaborated in Chapter III. Discussion in the present chapter will focus on establishing a theoretical ground as follows: 1. Phenomenology: a way of showing the grounding of phenomena of commonsense knowledge in the everyday world. (As explicated in the work of Alfred Schutz) (1962, 1964, 1966, 1970, 1973); and 2. Ethnomethodology: based on the work of Alfred Schutz and elaborated in the work of Harold Garfinkel (1963, 1967), Leiter (1971; 1980) and Douglas (1970). This study has been informed by the reasoning of Alfred Schutz (1962) that phenom-enology offers a way of distinguishing two problems pertinent to the study of human action in a social context: 1. Commonsense knowledge which prompts an individual to socially construct what is factual in everyday life; and 2. Commonsense knowledge as a resource for inquiry. In elaborating an individual's commonsense knowledge in everyday life Schutz (1962) reasoned that there was a need to address "a series of complicated problems" associated with interest and perceived relevance, and how they become determined. In a later work Schutz (1970) explored how an individual's interests (topics, motives and interpretive proce-dures) are brought to bear on how phenomena are socially constituted. Insight into what Schutz meant when he talked about topics, motives and interpretive procedure offers a way of understanding how relevance is constituted. Such constructs are not regarded by Schutz as discrete; taken together they aid one in understanding how relevance is constituted as 32 commonsense knowledge in everyday life. The problem of how an individual arrives at what is relevant in everyday life will be discussed first as commonsense knowledge, and following that, as the constitution of rele-vance with reference to topics, motives and interpretive procedures. Commonsense Knowledge in Everyday Life In his work Alfred Schutz (1962) posed the question of which motives arising in commonsense knowledge in everyday life prompt people to accept some parts of phenomena as relevant while regarding other parts as questionable. I take it that for Schutz (1973, p. 3), "commonsense knowledge" in everyday life means that life is experienced as a deter-minate social world for an individual; one which is accepted as being out there and inde-pendent of anyone's perception of it. Events are experienced in a taken-for-granted "paramount reality" (Schutz, 1962, p. 230). Schutz and Luckmann (1973) state: By the everyday life-world is to be understood that province of reality which the wide-awake and normal adult simply takes for granted in the attitude of commonsense. By this taken for grantedness, we designate everything which we experience as unquestionable; every state of affairs is for us unproblematic until further notice, (pp. 3-4) Through commonsense knowledge in everyday life an individual is able to overcome any im-petus to represent reality as basically chaotic. Similarly Garfinkel (1967) reflects on com-monsense knowledge as the perceived normality of events. Any aspect of social structure that man grasps as giving an appearance of reasonableness to the world constitutes a view of the world as factual. At this point we have to ask, what do individuals typically make reference to when dealing with such particular topics and themes as nation, art, education, science, and government! That is, how do individuals decide in these and similar cases what is relevant? Schutz (1962) felt that there was a general neglect by social science of what the social world means to an individual living within it. He asserts that we cannot understand people's social acts without attempting to understand what motivates them; social acts are directly tied for meaning to the member's commonsense knowledge in everyday life. Schutz (1964) elaborates: 33 I cannot understand a social thing without reducing it to the human activity which has created it and, beyond it, without referring this human activity to the motives out of which it springs. I do not understand a tool without knowing the purpose for which it was designed, a sign or symbol without knowing what it stands for. (p. 10) It is as if any artifact, tool, physical or mental object produced stands on behalf of a course of action. Consequently the way of reasoning of the maker or user of objects has to be studied as such in order to understand how out of an array of possibilities, some phe-nomena are apprehended as relevant. Herein lies the problem referred to by Schutz. The problem of facticity or intersubjectivity is described as a tension between what is experi-enced from one's own individual niche while simultaneously experienced as a world known in common. This dilemma is resolved through the practices of commonsense knowledge which Garfinkel accepts as an individual's methods or strategies at work. These strategies used by people to socially construct what is relevant become the focus of this study. The way(s) in which members of a group make choices and take action is described as an individual's commonsense knowledge (Schutz, 1962) in everyday life, and is character-ized as having three properties: 1. the natural attitude as an individual's sense of social structure, 2. the individual's stock of knowledge at hand, and 3. commonsense reasoning. The Natural Attitude The expectancies of the natural attitude of everyday life are described as a specification of an individual's sense of social structure; that is, through a process of interpretation an indi-vidual arrives at what can be made of what is experienced. (Schutz, 1962; 1964; 1970). These interpretations are ongoing, giving a quality of stability and order to everyday life. Schutz and Luckman (1973) say: Interpretation of meaning, "understanding" is a fundamental principle of the natural attitude with regard to my fellow-men. (p. 16) It is the fix that enables an individual to recognize the everyday world as out there and ba-sically unchaotic. The notion of the natural attitude is similar to that explicated by Husserl (1975): 34 I find continually present and standing over against me the one spatio-temporal fact-world to what I myself belong, as do all other men found in it, and re-lated in the same way to it. This fact-world, as the world already tells us, I find to be out there, and also take it just as it gives itself to me as something that exists out there. Al l doubting and rejecting of the data of the natural world leaves standing the general thesis of the natural standpoint. In describing the natural attitude of everyday life, Schutz (1962) offers the following characterizations: First, for the most part the world of everyday life is taken for granted and inter-preted using taken-for-granted categories. Action and interaction in human events sedimented in custom and tradition form the basic frame of reference from which we expe-rience the world as organized over time and the social structure of everyday life is seen as a shared and typified experience. Schutz (1962) describes as follows an individual's natural attitude: This world existed before our birth, experienced and interpreted by others, our predecessors, as an organized world. Now it is given to our experience and in-terpretation. A l l interpretation of this world is based on a stock of previous ex-periences of it, our own or those handed down to us by parents or teachers; these experiences in the form of "knowledge at hand" function as a scheme of reference, (p. 7) The second characterization describes the sense of an intersubjective world that is common to us all; a world where individuals expect to be understood by others and expect to be able to understand them. Schutz (1962) says: I take it for granted—and assume my fellow-man does the same—that if I change places with him so that his "here" becomes mine, I shall be at the same distance from things and see them with the same typicality as he actually does; moreover, the same things would be in my reach which are actually in his. (p. 12) Third, the individual in the natural attitude of daily life does not entertain global doubts about the sustained orderliness of the world. Schutz (1962) says: As long as the once-established scheme of reference, the system of our and other people's warranted experiences works, as long as the actions and opera-tions performed under its guidance yield the desired results, we trust these ex-periences. We are not interested in finding out whether this world really does exist or whether it is merely a coherent system of consistent appearances, (p. 228) Fourth, for each individual it is the purpose at hand and the setting that mutually determine how a particular circumstance is to be interpreted. For any project at hand a var-iable number of features stand out as being of more relevance than others, and yet in spite 35 of this variation a sense of persistence of stability and order is sustained. This is because a "knowledge at hand" of the everyday world takes the form of taken-for-granted categories that are used by an individual to sustain order and stability of interpretation. Schutz (1962) says, "For example, the outer world is not experienced as an arrangement of individual and unique objects dispersed in space and time, but as "mountains," "trees," "animals," "fellowmen" which are the "unique possessive" (p. 9) of a biographically determined situa-tion (pp. 7-8). For instance, in seeing my dog come toward me, I greet him by the name Sundance, and recognize that he is eager to be walked. While there are other designations such as canine and sheep dog which typify this animal, I've grown accustomed to seeing him in one way. Schutz (1962) says: It is this purpose at hand which defines those elements among all the others contained in such a situation which are relevant for this purpose. This system of relevances in turn determines what elements have to be made a substratum of generalizing typification, what traits of these elements have to be selected as characteristically typical, and what others as unique and individual, that is, how far we have to penetrate into the open horizon of typicality, (p. 9) Fifth, social phenomena institutionalized as standard behavior are passed from genera-tion to generation and are used as such to maintain a sense of social stability and control. The institutionalization of roles to an idealized state opens up the possibility of a gap be-tween such social structural features and an individual's biographical experience - thus ne-cessitating an ongoing continuous negotiation of fit. Schutz (1962) explains that it is an individual's commonsense knowledge and system of relevances which bridge such gaps be-tween institutional expectation and personal biography in sustaining an attitude of a world known in common and a sense of social structure. This process say Schutz and Luckmann (1973) is "pervasively determined by a pragmatic motive" (p. 6). What is maintained by an individual is the sense that the intersubjective world is shared as a similarly experienced our world. An individual is able to conjure up a ready made store of efficient recipes and methods as typical means for bringing about typical ends (Schutz & Luckmann, 1973). More than that, the individual is able to make sense of any experience by seeing it as per-taining to a particular problem. Any actual perception is tied to a procedure, recipe, rule, 36 social type, or convention taken as "natural" or "typical." People, objects, and events also are typified in terms of the degree of intimacy or anonymity they have in relationship to individual experience. In some cases I share with my fellow human being a face-to-face relationship with mutual involvement in each other's ex-perience. On the other hand, there are a great number of people whom I know only in a "shallow" way. Each day, I encounter people as teachers, parents, students, and stenographers as I go about my daily work. I have formed a commonsense construct of these people which is to a great extent socially derived from, and socially approved by, the in-group. Nevertheless, from my personal niche I bring specific sense to the work done by people in these roles when I decide what any present occasion means. Putting grades on a standard form, I expect that unknown people, called "clerks of the Registrar's Office," will act in a typical way, not quite intelligible to me, with the result that this information will reach students, within a reasonable time. It becomes apparent that an increase in anonymity involves a decrease of full-ness of content. The more anonymous the typifying construct is, the more de-tached it is from the uniqueness of the individual fellowman involved and the fewer aspects of his personality and behavior pattern enter the typification as being relevant for the purpose at hand, for the sake of which the type has been constructed. These anonymous type roles are perceived as standards for per-formances and as such are passed on from member to member. What becomes important here is the expectancy that no matter what the degree of intimacy or anonymity, I am able to assume a role in relationship to others so that day-to-day work can proceed. Schutz (1962) not only intended the natural attitude to serve to explicate the properties of a socially constructed world, he also intended it to be problematic. Establishing contradictory characteristics turn the natural attitude into a task. The five idealizations de-scribed above stand to represent how it is possible for an individual to bridge the gap be-tween personal niche and the expectation of a world known in common. What is significant to the present study is the on-going nature of this task. 37 Stock of Knowledge at Hand The stock of knowledge is a property of the individual's commonsense knowledge which allows that person to get along in the world of everyday life thus, Schutz and Luckmann (1973) say: Each step of my explication and understanding of the world is based at any given time on a stock of previous experience, my own immediate experiences as well as such experiences as are transmitted to me from my fellow-men and above all from my parents, teachers, and so on. Al l of these communicated and immediate experiences are included in a certain unity having the form of my stock of knowledge, which serves me as the reference schema for the actual step of my explication of the world, (p. 7) A stock of knowledge serves to provide a scheme of reference or an interpretative frame-work of possible or alternative actions as I work towards a purpose. It consists chiefly of socially derived procedures, recipes, rules, social types, and conventions with a characteristic endorsement as my immediate experience. Hence, only a small fraction of man's stock of knowledge at hand originates in his own individual experience. The greater portion of his knowledge is socially derived, handed down to him by his parents, and teachers as his social heritage. It consists of a set of systems of relevant typifications, of typical solutions for typical practical and theoretical problems, typical precepts for typical behavior including the pertinent system of appresentational references. Al l this knowledge is taken for granted beyond question by the respective social group and is thus socially approved knowledge. (Schutz, 1962, p. 348) To become familiar with any problem in everyday life is to come to have sufficient typified knowledge to deal with a purpose at hand. What it means to act with purpose can be taken as the individual's arrival at a state where knowledge at hand is deemed sufficient enough to prompt action. As indicated above, Schutz (1973) accepts that an individual is not in pos-session of or familiar with all the knowledge that is available to a society on a given topic. In this respect, a stock of knowledge may be a concentration of features with which we are merely acquainted or knowledge of which we are profoundly aware. Knowledge is therefore deemed sufficient enough for our practical purposes at the time. Schutz (1966) says: Let us call the knowledge which at a certain moment of time the individual has at his disposal in the way described above his stock of knowledge, and its sev-eral gradations, its degree of familiarity, (p. 121) Familiarity according to Schutz (1973) presupposes for any occasion an accepted way of viewing a task, hence, the natural attitude. Schutz (1973) says: 38 Familiarity thus indicates the likelihood of referring new experiences, in respect of their types, to the habitual stock of already acquired knowledge. This refer-ence may occur by means of a passive synthesis of recognition. The object now actually experienced proves to be the "same", or the "same but modified", or a "like" or a "similar" object, or an object which I previously experienced pos-sibly many times. But this "sameness", "likeness", or "similarity" refers only to typical properties which the new object has in common with those I have previ-ously experienced, (pp. 58-59) Schutz uses the term object to designate any item of knowledge taken for granted (Schutz, 1962) and not just physical objects. In reference to an object, what I make of it is influ-enced by the degree of familiarity of the relevant portions of my stock of knowledge and the purpose at hand. The more general a typifying construct is, the more it is to be de-tached from the unique practical circumstances and the individual's purpose at hand. The more generalized a statement of procedure or convention, the more there is a chance that a diverse range of actions can be interpreted and accounted for as falling into conformity with its formulation: The more these interlocked behavior patterns are standardized and institution-alized, that is, the more their typicality is socially approved by laws, folkways, mores, and habits, the greater is their usefulness in common-sense and scien-tific thinking as a scheme of interpretation of human behavior. (Schutz, 1962, p. 62) For an individual interpreting phenomena a diverse range of choices is possible depending upon how anonymous the social structural features are that describe an object. What is im-portant to keep in mind is that a stock of knowledge with meaning which is not clearly straightforward will for all practical purposes become resolved to the satisfaction of an indi-vidual. Schutz and Luckmann (1973) say: The stock of knowledge pertaining to thinking within the lifeworld is to be un-derstood not as a context transparent in its totality, but rather as a totality of "self-evidences" changing from situation to situation, being set into relief at any given time by a background of indeterminacy, (p. 9) Schutz (1962) asks us to consider also what an individual will accept as reasonable and notes that what will be regarded as reasonable on occasion need not be regarded as ide-ally rational. Such standards might be traditionally or habitually accepted as just being taken for granted, and within the meaning of our previous definitions; behavior of this kind will be sensible or even reasonable but not necessarily rational. At any 39 rate it will not be "ideally" rational, that is, meeting all the requirements worked out in the analysis of this concept, (p. 32) In any particular situation an individual with a unique biography will not make use of all facets of a situation nor all of her or his knowledge. Schutz (1962) describes how each individual arrives at the typicality of people, objects and events: It just means that we grasp merely certain aspects of it, namely those which are relevant to us whether for carrying on our business of living or from the point of view of a body of accepted rules of procedure of thinking called the method of science, (p. 5) Thus, in daily life we are concerned with some features as part of a "particular typified ob-ject" and not others (p. 9). An object is identified on the basis of some selected features viewed as characteristic and typical. In the aforementioned discussion, knowledge was shown as socially derived. However, because knowledge can be general or specific and things can be familiar in different degrees, and because we have unique biographies, when we are faced with actual choices, the ones made are constituted in an interpretation of a momentory situation and pushed only as far as is convenient for the purpose at hand. Depending upon the contingencies of any one oc-casion some particular features among many are made to stand out as being relevant. To make unique choices from the stock of knowledge means to act on assumptions about that uniqueness while simultaneously assuming there is a world known in common. We turn now to commonsense reasoning as the means of selection from an individual's stock of knowledge. Commonsense Reasoning The community in which we share our experiences in everyday life can be described as being intersubjective in character. It is not my community nor your community, nor even the two combined; it is a world which draws us into it as participants in a common scheme. Com-monsense reasoning enables us to do this by overcoming an individual difference which might arise and stand in the way of sustaining a sense of intersubjective reality. Gurwitsch (1966), in explicating the tension that becomes resolved through commonsense reasoning 40 points to "the dual role of man, who is at the same time both a mundane existent among others, an object within a shared world, and a subject with respect to the world, i.e., a subject from whose experiences and mental operations the world derives the sense of its ex-istence" (p. 434). Commonsense reasoning (Schutz, 1962) overcomes the tension between one's individ-ual niche in the world and the sense of a world known in common by way of the natural attitude and the stock of knowledge at hand. In summary, the common assumption of the interchangeability of standpoints suggest that if we were to change places, I and my fellowmen would see events, objects, and people in the same way and would apprehend ex-perience as shared. The idealization of the congruency of the system of relevances affirms that, for the purpose at hand I take it for granted that in deciding the relevance of events, objects and people, most differences in our personal ways of assigning meaning can be dis-regarded. It is important here to reiterate that Schutz is not suggesting that because we sense the world as intersubjective, it is given in actuality as one homogeneous event. Each indi-vidual lives in a number of finite provinces of meaning, each endowed with its own cogni-tive style requiring interpretive work to bridge gaps and gear into any present occasion. Schutz (1962) states: We prefer to speak instead of many subuniverses of reality of finite provinces of meaning upon each of which we may bestow the accent of reality. We speak of provinces of meaning and not of subuniverses because it is the meaning of our experiences and not the ontological structure of the objects which consti-tutes reality. Hence, we call a certain set of our experiences a finite province of meaning if all of them show a specific cognitive style and are—with respect to this style—not only consistent in themselves but also compatible with one an-other, (p. 230) Further to this point Schutz goes on to say that how an individual makes choices, so-cially structures an event from the perspective of a finite province of meaning, depends upon what topics and intentions are seen as standing out. It appears that the context in which one works becomes more than a "world common to us all" (p. 112), rather it is a world given meaning by an individual who maintains membership in an indefinite number of provinces. Consequently: 41 "Working" means "gearing" into the outer world, which indicates that I as an actor on the social scene know that my bodily actions in and on the world change it, modify the objects in it and their various relations (and that I in turn am changed and modified by them)—changes that are experienced by me and my fellowman such that they are able to "see" what I have done and I what they have done. (Zaner, 1970, p. xvii) It is the work of an individual on an occasion which establishes what features will stand out as important in respect to the purpose at hand. It is this notion of "work" or "task" that characterizes the everyday/jess of a stock of knowledge; that is, the persistent variation in experiences requires continuous strategy in order to' apprehend structure. An individual's sense of the social world as a determinate object is accomplished by an array of indeterminate qualities. For a stock of knowledge on any one occasion, there is always the need for adjustment, abandonment and replacement by something else. Thus a selective function operates guiding our projects, actions, and deeds (Schutz, 1962). In conclusion, Schutz's discussion of the natural attitude, stock of knowledge and commonsense reasoning suggests that the properties exhibited by commonsense knowledge reveal what is inherently problematic in any individual's attempt to endow the world with meaning. It is commonsense reasoning which overcomes the problematic in experience by means of the work of the individual who through an interpretive framework tries to deter-mine appropriateness and reconcile it with what is believed to be held in common. An attempt has been made to present commonsense knowledge as more than an individual's acceptance of a set of procedures, recipes, rules, social types, and conventions of an in-group sustaining common consensus. Rather, we are invited to see any features of social structure used by an individual as an effort by the individual to understand her or his world and the setting in which it is used as mutually interacting. Before discussing the adoption of an ethnomethodological stance which focuses on the study of descriptive accounts, I would like to extend this discussion of commonsense knowl-edge to include how Schutz (1970) dealt with commonsense knowledge as relevance. 42 Commonsense Knowledge as a System of Relevance After elaborating on the usefulness of the properties of an individual's commonsense knowledge to an understanding of the formation of a sense of social structure, it seems im-portant to try to focus on how Schutz understood commonsense knowledge to be elaborating an individual's system of relevance. Schutz (1970) argues that the problem of relevance lies at the root of the question of the formation and choice of actions likely to take place with-in the world of everyday life, and, hence, why certain social structural features move to the forefront as expectancies while others are rejected. Choice of action is explicated by Schutz (1970) as turning personal experience into the sense that one is dealing in a determinate way with an objective reality. While he focused on relevance in his later work (1970), he never lost sight of his earlier conviction that it is commonsense knowledge that offers a profound insight into how meaning is negotiated. According to Schutz, relevance pertains to the individual's experiencing, gearing into, and working in the world, and not merely that aspect of the experienced world of common-sense knowledge known as the stock of knowledge. Thus, as indicated earlier, the constitu-tion of systems of relevance comprises of an individual's natural attitude, and commonsense reasoning as well as the stock of knowledge at hand. It is the interpolation of the various properties of commonsense knowledge which reveals how relevance is recognized. For Schutz, arriving at what is relevant can be correlated with how certain things in a typified world come to occupy the forefront of one's interests at any one time. First we have a framework. Schutz (1964) says: The sum total of these various typifications constitutes a frame of reference in terms of which not only the socio-cultural, but also the physical world has to be interpreted, a frame of reference that, in spite of its inconsistencies and its inherent opaqueness, is nonetheless sufficiently integrated and transparent to be used for solving most of the practical problems at hand. (p. 233) An element of individual interest comes into play bringing to the horizon some features within the frame of reference while cancelling out others. Certain features deemed not to be pertinent to a situation or purpose are ignored while others are regarded as sanctioned. This process of choice making is elaborated by what Schutz (1962) determines to be an 43 individual's interest: The structurization of my stock of knowledge at hand is determined by the fact that I am not equally interested in all the strata of the world within my reach. The selective function of interest organizes the world for me in strata of major and minor relevances, (p. 310) The problem of formulating relevance and representing emerging themes or features in a neutral field is tied for its meaning to the biographical situation of an individual whose unique set of past experiences interplay with the situation at hand in typifying experience. Cox (1978) says: Typifications are formed in virtue of ignoring those particularizing traits which are not pertinent, or relevant, to the purpose for which the typification is formed. Every typification comes to be formed only within some context, with a view to some end, for the sake of some goal. (p. 9) Thus, using a frame of reference derived from our use of commonsense knowledge and with consideration of the problem at hand categories emerge to make possible the interpretation of a current situation. Three properties which constitute relevance will be discussed as fol-lows: topical relevance, interpretational relevance, and motivational relevance. Topical Relevance In any situational context my unique biographical circumstances motivate a topical theme that I voluntarily turn to, or upon which I reflect. A topical theme serves to focus attention in a situational context. However, each individual in a social context with unique interests shares enough in common with others to permit the flow of interaction in everyday life. For the individual who is part of an in-group, a topic attended to takes on meaning with a view to what is approved and recognizable within the framework of interacting mem-bers. Since a member lives in multiple contexts, as might be implied by any designation of role (gardener, student, driver), there are many problematic possibilities which priorize choice depending upon the interplay between the biographical circumstances of the member, as personal niche and the situational context which demands appropriateness. However, the formation of a topical theme in a context of many problematic possibilities means that whatever is decided is not resolved in isolation but in terms of what is possible. Thus, 44 relevance is resolved as a system of interrelated problems. As the problematic gains focus, topical relevances arise and delimit the thrust of inquiry in everyday life, shaping the solution as well as the purpose at hand. For example, marks made in colored chalk on the sidewalk of a public park might represent an act of artistic expression for the person who has been looking for a place to draw; on the other hand, the person who maintains the park, might see the same marks as the work of a vandal. What is topically relevant and the way it is topically relevant is guided by a pragmatic motive in the context of an interpretive framework. Interpretational Relevance In the forementioned, it was suggested that what is topically relevant to our interest delimits the extent of inquiry in everyday life and in the same sense the direction of in-quiry. Since topical relevances describe the scope within which experiencing takes place, it is apparent that there is an interplay between interpretational relevances and topical relevances that makes it difficult to discuss one property without discussing the other. Schutz (1970) asserts that there is no isolated interpretational relevances as such, but only an interpretational relevance referring to a given topic; that is, one mutually determines the other. In interpretation, an individual's familiarity with a setting constitutes what can pos-sibly come into play. How is it then that something is constituted as problematic in a field of unquestionable familiarity? If one had a sense of routinely experiencing an object as one way, then it is the disintegration of these typical expectations which creates the propensity for a problematic situation. I take it that Schutz is saying that it is the interplay between biography and social structure which gives rise to the purpose at hand and priorizes what is to become topical and problematic. Schutz (1970) says: Within the context of his previous experiences (of any kind) as preserved by memory and arranged by previous interpretations into his stock of knowledge actually at hand, there are many [experiences] which have nothing to do with the interpretation of the object before him, which are entirely irrelevant for in-terpreting this new object. On the other hand, there are a few coherent types of previous experiences with which the present object might be compared—that is, interrelated by sameness, likeness, similarity, and so on. We may call the latter relevant elements for his interpreting of the new set of perceptions, (p. 36) 45 I take it that the various contexts in which an object is located favors the selection of cer-tain features over others thus leading us to interpret the situation in a particular way. For example I may recognize an object as art in the context of a museum. In shifting my attentional gaze, this same object takes on different meaning in a Fijiian village where it is part of a domestic household. The possibility of an adjustive effort in interpretation arises when I need to resolve the presence of the artifact in a museum having seen its kind in a Fijiian village. Similarly, the interpretive work of the supervisor of the park board, left to decide what can be made of a set of chalk lines in the context of the park setting is guided by purposes known to this person. How we arrive at interpretations is strongly influenced by what it is we want to achieve at the time—what our motives are. What moves a person toward certain choices to resolve this problem will be taken up as motivational relevance. Motivational Relevance Imputing meaning to people, objects, and events is done to render them recognizable on occasion. To begin to understand the motives behind the supervisor's action on an occa-sion or what can be made of any object such as chalk lines, we must refer back to the strategies people use to make them recognizable in a particular way. In locating these strat-egies we begin to disclose motives imputed as typical reasons for seeing an action or rule one way rather than another. I impute motives, or typify action in an attempt to grasp what it is I see, or to establish a plan of action. Schutz, describes two kinds of motives: in-order-to motives as ends to be reached which are projected acts or goals toward which one strives. Motives which explain on the basis of the individual's past experience drawing upon biography are because-motives. In-order-to motives induce the other to act in a particular way; that is, there is the expectation that the other will take up my in-order-to motive and make it her or his because-motive. This supervisor of the park's board expects people to be guided by legislation that prohibits the defacing of public property. In projecting an in-order-to motive toward the other, I antici-pate, and indeed expect, that this person will be advised by the same motives as I and others were in the past when circumstances were the same. However, where any present 46 action is one in the context of a series of actions, there is only a chance that the other per-son will know and follow ray in-order-to motives. Further to this, in approving (or disap-proving of) the course of action of another person we must ask whose motives, topics and strategies are used to determine acceptability in a current situation. The above discussion of commonsense knowledge was first addressed as social struc-ture and how it is achieved (natural attitude, stock of knowledge and commonsense reason-ing). It was then addressed as relevance (topics, interpretation and motive). To reiterate, these categories are not to be regarded as discrete entities in everyday life. It is only when they are taken together, that they begin to help us to understand how a person determines what is relevant. Both approaches were intended by Schutz to explore the problem of how phenomena becomes recognizable and approved by a person. This process of arriving at rel-evance and social structure operates as a useful resource for the present study. It will be used as a stance to guide me in disclosing the strategies teachers use to make recognizable action in the classroom as a locally approved way of accomplishing art. The intent is to move beyond description of the what to ask how art is made recognizable and approved. In taking up ethnomethodology grounded in phenomenology, this study seeks to un-derstand an individual's descriptive accounts as the very vehicle through which commonsense knowledge becomes disclosed and available for inquiry. Ethnomethodology Ethnomethodology is the study of an individual's sense-making methods as strategies which ascribe to phenomena a sense of social order in everyday life. It takes as its mandate ways of addressing the problem of social order. Two themes (Leiter, 1980) unite all ethnomethodological studies: the sense of social order as the managed accomplishment of individuals in a social setting, and the strategies or methods used in bringing about that ac-complishment as they are revealed in descriptive accounts. These themes provide a focus for the account of social order elucidated by ethnomethodology and given attention here. 47 Descriptive Accounts: The Managed Accomplishment of a Sense of Social Order The preceding discussion of the problem of relevance and social order provides us with a stance for treating a person's descriptive accounts as a topic worthy of study. Ethnomethodologists study social order and how it is revealed in the descriptive accounts an individual uses to make recognizable and approved the status of people, objects and events in everyday life. Leiter (1980), speaking of the ways social order is made recognizable and given an approved status says: Members of society are continually engaged in displaying and detecting the orderly features of the social world, which are experienced as the sense of so-cial structure. Social order for ethnomethodologists refers to a sense of social order. Order, refers to the factual properties of object and events. A member's descriptive accounts as sense making practices of what they have accomplished contribute to the construction of social order in everyday life. (p. 159) The "sense" in "sense of social structure" underscores the notion of a social world that is a product of the way we look at it. In other words, "sense" makes reference to the continuous work done by an individual to establish the facticity of the social world. The so-cial world, is constituted through the strategies or sense-making methods of individuals as revealed in the ways they frame their descriptive accounts. Leiter (1980) uses the term "de-scriptive account" (p. 161) as a way of referring to ethnomethodology's interest in what people do and as well how they make recognizable and approved what they do. It is in this sense that I am using the term "descriptive accounts." The object of inquiry becomes the very vehicle through which the features of a setting are made available for research purposes: an individual's descriptive accounts. Zimmerman and Pollner (1973) describe how an occasion is different for the researcher than it is for the member of the setting: The topic then would consist not in the social order as ordinarily conceived, but rather in the ways in which members assemble particular scenes so as to pro-vide for one another evidences of a social order as-ordinarily-conceived. Thus, one would examine not the factual properties of status hierarchies, for example, but the fact of the factual properties of status hierarchies: one would ask how members provide for the fact that the status hierarchies are factual features of the members' world, (p. 83) I take it that the authors are suggesting that when people communicate their understanding of the factual properties of something they are simultaneously making recognizable the methods they use to arrive at such facticity. The ways members assemble and communicate 48 factual properties become the topic of inquiry. In moving beyond an interest in the facticity of the social world , I redirect my interest to the study of an individual's strategies that create facticity. Leiter (1980), in discussing descriptive accounts as mini-ethnographies available to a researcher, says: When members of society tell ethnographies to each other in the form of verbal reports, they seek to communicate their understanding of events to each other. While they are communicating these understandings to others, they are simulta-neously rendering the event observable and understandable to themselves, (p. 161) In a descriptive account, an individual is saying in only so many words what can be made of features chosen which in their view, typify the setting. For a researcher like myself, the emphasis in analyzing descriptive accounts is not so much on the content of an account as it is on the strategies that a teacher uses in rendering features of a setting recognizable as the teaching of art as usual. I would like to turn now to a description of these strategies or accomplishments as an individual's accounting practices. Accounting Practices: An Individual's Method of Accomplishment In everyday life, an individual can be viewed as using strategies to make recognizable (Garfinkel, 1963) the "perceived normality" of events (p. 188). By the perceived normality of events is meant properties that are taken as social structural features descriptive of the occasion of their use. The six properties referred to by Garfinkel that give an individual's work a perceived normality are as follows: 1. Typicality: features are recognizable as recurring over and over again. 2. Likelihood: features sustain the probability and conditions of occurrence and reoccurrence. 3. Comparability: features in an encountered event can be compared to other events in the past and future. 4. Causal texture: features of an event have antecedent conditions that can be located. 5. Instrumental efficiency: features are set in means-ends relationships and these can be detected. 6. Moral requiredness: A l l of the above features and their conditions have the force of compelling the individual towards a state of normative con-straint; that is, the perceived normality of events. Garfinkel analyses ways in which people assign meaning and percieved normality to events much the same as Schutz does when he says that properties which are located as 49 social structural features of a setting are not so much "assigned" as they are "managed" (1967, p. 94) by an individual. To ask how it is that a person makes recognizable social structural features on any one occasion is to ask about the strategies used to make recogniz-able and thus to manage a person's work as an instance of what is locally approved. Thus, understanding the language of a given descriptive account is not simply a matter of under-standing sentences, but of seeing the sentence against a background of who, what, where, and when in the light of the adjustive effort an individual makes and which lead him/her to see them in a particular way. The meaning implicit in a descriptive account is dependent on recognizing the account in the context of its production. Leiter (1980) reiterates the impor-tance of contextualized meaning: That context consists of such particulars as who the speaker is (his biography), the relevant aspects of his biography, his current purpose and intent, the setting in which the remarks are made, or the actual or potential relationship between speaker and hearer, (p. 107) To understand what any social structural feature might mean on an occasion, is to identify not only the relevant features but also the context in which they are made recognizable. Talk can thus be seen as flexible, allowing for an approximate relationship between the talk and a range of states of affairs. As Douglas (1973) says: This is the principle of the contextual determination of meaning, the basic idea of which is that the context within which a given statement or action occurs is of fundamental importance in determining the meanings imputed to it by the members of society, (p. 37) Following this, it can be said that a descriptive account given by a person evokes a context to be searched by the researcher and in turn the results of this search elaborate the specific sense of a descriptive account. More specifically social structural features that characterize a descriptive account elab-orate and are elaborated by the same account in which they appear. Garfinkel uses the term indexical to describe contextualized meaning. The indexical property of objects establishes that from an array of possible meanings a sense of meaning is produced for that occasion. For example, in a particular context a person might be heard uttering, "I like it." The work necessary for understanding the term it involves a mutual elaboration between the 50 descriptive account, "I like it." and the context in which it is heard. Talk itself is taken to be essentially plurisemantic until it is tied for its meaning to the occasion of its use. Yet herein lies the rub, talk as indexical must not be thought of as indeterminate. Leiter (1980) says: Indexicality does not refer to the meaninglessness of talk. Quite the contrary, it refers to the multiple meanings of talk and to the fact that meaning is assigned by assembling an ethnographic context for the talk, (which includes using details of the talk as part of the context), (p. 110) As indicated, talk itself has an indexical quality so that meaning, as it is generated, is a re-sult of a mutual elaboration of the talk and other features found in a setting. This process of elaboration, is referred to by Garfinkel (1967) as the reflexivity of accounts. He states: Members' accounts are reflexively and essentially tied for their rational features to the socially organized occasions of their use for they are features of the so-cially organized occasions of their use! (p. 4) To recapitulate, features of a setting including talk are assigned meaning depending upon the context in which the features are embedded. Through specification of meaning in a context, features can take on a perceived normality. For ethnomethodology such social structural features are seen as being used to render the character of social reality recogniz-able and thus factual. This is not to mean that a context is treated as if it were caused by social structural features; rather, these features are aids to perception transforming phenom-ena at hand into something recognizable through interpretation. For any social structural feature to become comprehensible, it requires a context in which that social action becomes recognizable. The indexical and reflexive properties inherent in all social structures means that the features recognized by an individual in a setting and produced in talk, mutually in-teract with the setting itself. Thus, I am invited to locate a context in which social structural features are given by a teacher and to discover the strategies used by the teacher to make recognizable these features as locally approved ways of teaching and learning about art. Descriptive accounts given by teachers about the teaching of art will be studied in an attempt to disclose how they present in context a picture of actions carried out: what types of people are given what roles in this action, what is regarded as likely to satisfy the 51 requirements of what to do next, and what contingencies become considerations. Garfinkel (1967), whose work demonstrates the importance of the study of "accounting practices," makes reference to this kind of inquiry as a documentary search for meaning. This search for a unified pattern underlying an array of possibilities open to choice guides the present study of teachers' descriptive accounts. In Chapter IV, I shall describe the usefulness of the documentary method of interpretation as a way to search for ethnographic data to enlighten us about a teacher's understanding of art. Summary The theoretical stance elaborated in Chapter II offers a way of addressing the teaching of art when it invites us to regard a teacher's descriptive accounts as ethnographic data. Such data will be used to disclose the strategies a teacher uses to sustain and make recog-nizable her or his work as the good teacher of art. In accepting a stance which asserts the importance of commonsense knowledge in everyday life, we move beyond a conception of the art teaching task as guided solely by a stock of knowledge to include the strategies used by a teacher making recognizable art as approved action in the context of the school. The art teaching task will be described as it simultaneously appears as part of the school setting and as it tells about that setting. My task is to start with the observed activ-ities of the teachers and from there to discover the methods a teacher uses to give meaning to these activities. In moving beyond observation to ask how a teacher accounts for class-room events, I move beyond simple description of activities to explore the complexity of strategies used by a teacher in making recognizable the teaching and learning of art as lo-cally approved work. In the chapter to follow, an attempt will be made to generate questions for the pres-ent study which explicate a teacher's commonsense knowledge, including, 1. the natural attitude, the purpose of which is to assert the facticity of the teaching and learning of art, 2. a stock of knowledge, with its idealizations of who, what, when, where which serves as a point of reference in making the teaching of art recognizable and approved, and 52 3. commonsense reasoning as the strategy used by a teacher to make the art teaching task recognizable and approved. 53 CHAPTER III T H E CONSTITUTION OF QUESTIONS Introduction The purpose of this chapter is to generate a series of questions which take into con-sideration commonsense knowledge as including the strategies a teacher uses in an everyday situation to create and sustain an interpretation of her or his work as locally approved work recognizable as art as usual in the school day. The questions generated are a result of the discussion in Chapter I of a need to understand a teacher's commonsense knowledge and the elaboration in Chapter II of commonsense knowledge. Questions generated take into consid-eration commonsense knowledge as distinguished in the following three themes described in Chapter II: the natural attitude, the stock of knowledge at hand, and commonsense reason-ing. The Natural Attitude The expectancies of the natural attitude of everyday life comprise an individual's sense of facticity and represent her or his orientation. It is thus that an individual establishes the social world to be a factual one derived from experience through interpretation. I take it that what is meant by the natural attitude is the ongoing cognitive processing of phenomena done by an individual who as a result finds the properties of the world to be simply there as an enduring view of the world. The following summarize Schutz's (1962) elaboration of the natural attitude: 1. objects of the world are "well delineated things that we recognize and act upon" (p. 208). 2. out of a seeming flux of possibilities in the world only those objects which can be interpreted as having purpose are recognized (p. 208). 3. this same world of objects is felt to be shared with others as an "intersubjective world" (p. 208) 4. objects in the world are taken for granted "until counter proof imposes 54 itself" (p. 228) 5. attention to certain objects traces out that segment of the world which is "pragmatically relevant" as the "form and content of our stream of thought" (p. 213) Garfinkel (1963) characterizes a member's sense of social structure as the "perceived nor-mality of events" (p. 188) which take the form of "idealizations" (Leiter 1971 p. 75) or social structural features whereby individuals provide themselves and others with a sense of the factual world. It is useful at this time to reexamine social structure vis-a-vis the disci-plinary perspective of art education and how it is that we have come to ask about the orientation of the good teacher of art. As indicated in Chapter I, art education can be viewed as part of a socially structured order organized to attempt to move prospective members from one state to another. It is made manifest in art education textbooks, curriculum guides, professional journals, and other reading matter supported by art education. Art education orientations are recognized as an attempt to direct change and sustain order as teachers and hopefully their students are moved from what is described as an unenlightened state to a more enlightened one with a reconsideration of preconceived notions of what constitutes acceptable knowledge of art and how it should be taught. Maintenance of the social structure of art education is thus contin-gent on a membership which recognizes and sanctions standard expectations. The success of art education is thought to be discernible in two desired outcomes re-ferred to in Chapter I as follows: the adoption by the classroom teacher of a standard art education orientation, and linked to this outcome, the restraint of a school art style believed to stand in opposition to art education. However, it has been claimed that in actuality these outcomes remain unrealized. It may be that this is because the natural attitudes of the class-room teacher and the art educator do not concur and thus they have not achieved a consen-sus of opinion regarding the teaching and learning of art. In recognizing this state of disjuncture wherein one system of relevance appears to confront another, it may be that the classroom teacher is not informed by the same set of guidelines as the art educator. This study will examine the character of a teacher's orientation to the teaching and learning of art. 55 Question What is the character of the art teaching task as it is disclosed in descriptive accounts given by an elementary school teacher? The Stock of Knowledge at Hand An individual's stock of knowledge at hand consists of some set of guidelines that an-swer the questions who, what, when, and where. As general ways of accomplishing a task, these guidelines await the interpretive work done by a teacher on an occasion to bring a recognizable sense to them. Social structural features of these guidelines and the manner in which they are made to take on a specific sense of meaning will be referred to from now on as features. Features as part of the guidelines are a collection of typifications of previ-ous experiences which, in reciprocal interaction with the contingencies of any particular sit-uation, take on specific meaning and help determine what the individual regards as relevant at a particular time. For any feature, a teacher finds a fit between it and the occasion of its use thereby deciding what is relevant on that occasion. Knowledge of art education orientations formulated outside the school are relevant to the study only to the extent that they are referred to by teachers in their descriptive ac-counts. To develop an awareness of such knowledge a second important question arises: Question What is the teacher's stock of knowledge which informs and is informed by the art teaching task? Commonsense Reasoning The community in which we share our day-to-day experiences is taken to be intersubjective in character; it is treated as a factual world of taken-for-granted meaning. However, in elaborating commonsense knowledge, it has been argued that the notion of a world common to us all is not unproblematic. In the theoretical stance assumed here com-monsense reasoning is understood to be invoked as a strategy useful in overcoming the sim-ultaneous experiencing of the world as my personal niche and a world known in common. It 56 is, in this account, the work of commonsense reasoning which makes comprehensible the features of a situation as recognizable and approved. The suggestion here is that it is the management of knowledge guiding the art teaching task which accounts for the way meaning is engendered. Our review of literature in Chapter I indicated that those who design art curricula and write about art teaching and learning assume that what they had intended at the time of the writing is what will be understood and acted upon in the elementary classroom. What seems to be overlooked is the complexity of contingencies encountered whenever a plan for art education is introduced into the practical circumstances of the classroom. Extrapolating from this, answers to additional questions are important in understanding the orientation of the good teacher of art: What features are used by the classroom teacher in talk to explicate art teaching and how are these features used as guidelines to make recognizable the work of the good teacher of art? Those questions can be compressed to read as follows: Question What are the strategies that a teacher uses to make recognizable her or his work as an instance of an approved way of accomplishing the art teaching task? Summary In summary, a call for study in Chapter I of how art teaching is constituted in the context of an elementary school classroom and a discussion of commonsense knowledge in Chapter II as a topic and resource for inquiry have contributed to the formulation of three questions which guide the present inquiry: 1. What is the character of the art teaching task as it is disclosed in descriptive accounts given by an elementary school teacher? 2. What is the teacher's stock of knowledge which informs and is informed by the art teaching task? 3. What are the strategies that a teacher uses to make recognizable Numbers 1 and 2 above; that is, what are the strategies a teacher uses to make recognizable her or his work as an instance of an approved way of accomplishing the art teaching task? 57 CHAPTER IV DESIGN OF INQUIRY Introduction Two ways of reasoning which lead to a state of disjuncture in the field of art educa-tion were put forward in Chapter I. First, art education orientations, and the research and scholarship associated with them, have been regarded as less than successful in disclosing to teachers in the field what it intentionally holds as relevant. Second, in designating what goes on in the elementary school classroom as school art, we have done little more than acknowledge its presence while doing little to understand the motivation and reasoning be-hind it. A review of the recent work of a number of educators indicated that there is need for a closer scrutiny of the organizational structure of the classroom setting as a condition bearing on how art is undertaken. Chapter II explicated an alternative way of viewing art by suggesting why teachers have a problematic tendency to see the world differently. To reca-pitulate, phenomenology offers a theoretic stance which seeks to explicate an individual's sense of the facticity of the social world as experienced in commonsense knowledge. More specifically, the properties of commonsense knowledge are taken to be the natural attitude, the stock of knowledge at hand, and commonsense reasoning. It is through these that a sense of social order is accepted by an individual as being out there and independent of any one person's perception of it. As indicated, the natural attitude asks how an individual arrives at an orientation to a social setting. A teacher can thus be viewed as continuously formulating descriptive accounts, which can be used to display the work wherein her or his orientation as the good teacher of art is made recognizable. Then, in Chapter III, questions for inquiry were presented which guide the undertaking of the present study. 58 Central to this present chapter is the explication of the documentary method of inter-pretation and its constitutive practices, the interpretive procedures. These interpretive schemes make up fundamental practices informing the analysis reported in Chapter V and VI . This Chapter will attempt to demonstrate the strategies teachers use to make features of the setting recognizable as pertaining to art. In Chapter V I will attempt to show that when taken together these features disclose a set of guidelines which orient the work of the good teacher of art. These guidelines, that make features recognizable as resources for inquiry, were studied as they became manifest in teachers' talk. My task was to make myself avail-able whenever there was an opportunity to observe, listen to, or engage in talk about what was going on in the classroom. By listening to what teachers said and by observing what they did, I was treating the manner in which features were given as a teacher's strategy making recognizable locally accepted ways of accomplishing the art teaching task. In discussing my research task, it is necessary to discuss how I gained entry into a field which comprises, for the purpose of this study, two elementary schools. Gaining Entry Into Two School Settings My task as a researcher was to locate settings at the elementary level where the activ-ity of teaching and doing art takes place on a routine basis. The art teaching task was taken as all the talk and behavior engaged in by a teacher in the context of accomplishing what went on in the time designated to the subject Art. It became clear in the early part of this study that it would be more fruitful to restrict the scope of the study to teachers' percep-tions of what was going on, excluding children and others, and thereby allowing for in-depth information to be collected. School children participating in the study are referred to simply as children. Reference to the researcher is in the first person. Teachers participating in the study are assigned code names. In an elementary school setting, a teacher is engaged in delivering descriptive accounts in the form of talk to a variety of people, namely, parents, children, and school personnel. 59 I reasoned that it would not seem unusual for a teacher to be delivering to me accounts in the form of talk that explicated events happening in an art classroom. I determined that the giving and receiving of descriptive accounts is a natural part of a school operation and is carried out to a great extent in verbal accounts. Thus, focusing on teacher talk and behavior as an incident of an accounting practice was not taken by the teachers as being an extraor-dinary event. Rather than limit my role in the field to observation, I reasoned that moderate participation, however limited, would give me a better opportunity to understand how a teacher guided the classroom. Access to each of the two schools participating in the study was obtained on separate occasions and in different ways. In early April 1982, I requested permission from Field Services, the Faculty of Education, The University of Alberta, to contact a school board in the province of Alberta for the purpose of doing inquiry. It was on an earlier occasion that an art consultant in this school district suggested I get permis-sion to work in a particular school she had in mind. She reasoned that the school did not have an extensive number of ongoing projects, and, as a result, there would be more of a likelihood of such a time extensive project being accepted. Permission was given by Field Services to contact the principal of the elementary school in question. The Field Services office took responsibility for making initial contact. I set up an appointment by telephone to meet with the school principal after forwarding to him a copy of a proposal outlining the intentions of my study. I arrived at the school early on the day of my appointment and announced myself at the front office. I was shown to the principal's office, and after a brief discussion of my intentions, four elementary school teachers contacted earlier by the school principal were invited to join us to discuss the proposal. I expected no more than one or two teachers to participate in the study since interviews are time-consuming and would necessitate extended meetings which would include before and after class time. An in-vitation to work with all four teachers was accepted. One of the teachers offered to outline a timetable and I was able to begin work on April 17, 1982.1 was present at all art lessons held between April 17, 1982 and June 17, 1982 with two teachers, and I spent one month each with the other teachers. In the latter case, both teachers suggested that I was welcome 60 in the classroom where I could do a moderate amount of observation and participation; however, they did not want to spend time outside school hours discussing the day's events. After an initial reading of the transcripts of both of the teachers in question, I decided not to include Teacher B in the study because we were unable to find sufficient time for discus-sion. Access was obtained to a second school in the Province of Alberta by making a tele-phone call to a principal of an elementary school. I had had previous contact with this per-son when I served as faculty consultant to a student teacher practicum that is part of a teacher education program in the Faculty of Education, the University of Alberta. On that occasion, my task as an academic staff member of the Faculty of Education of the Univer-sity of Alberta was to observe student teachers and to discuss their work with them as well as with the cooperating teachers and the principal of the school. I felt more comfortable visiting the second school because of these previous contacts. Following my initial request made to the school principal by telephone, I was contacted by him on the same day saying that four teachers offered to participate. My initial reaction was surprise since there had not been time to forward a formal proposal to them. On March 10, 1983, I visited the staff room at the school during the recess break and was introduced to each teacher by the principal. After discussion of the formal proposal, all the teachers agreed to participate in the study. One teacher organized a timetable for me, and I began work that day. I was able to rely on her advice throughout the study whenever questions of school protocol arose. I continued at the school to June 20, 1983. In deciding not to limit the number of teachers in the study, I reasoned that if a teacher was unable to continue there would remain a suffi-cient number of teachers to complete the study. As it turned out, the study was not under-taken in one classroom where practice was oriented to teaching English as a second language. In total six teachers participated in the study. A period of two months was spent in the first school and three months in the second school. I made one or two visits to each classroom per week. Each visit averaged three hours. Between ten and 35 visits were made 61 to each classroom. The participating teachers are code-named A , C, D , E , F , and G . The grade taught by each teacher and the years of teaching experience of each teacher are as follows: Years of Teacher Grade Teaching Experience A 1 33 C 3 10 D 3 8 E 5 12 F 6 11 G 5 1 In the transcribed materials, all the teachers were identified by the assigned code names. This remained a consistent practice throughout the study. It was reasoned that a strategy undertaken whereby teachers were identified by code enabled me to protect the identity of the participating schools and its members. The alphabetical code names were randomly assigned to teachers to make it less likely to identify them with a particular school. Descriptive accounts were recorded and transcribed whenever possible using an audio-tape recorder. In addition to this form of record keeping, I relied on handwritten field notes and photography. I gathered information at three time intervals related to the undertaking of art. When an opportunity presented itself in a presession discussion, I asked a teacher about her plans for the upcoming art classes. This procedure was followed up with participant-observation in which I took notes and audio-tape recorded classroom interaction. Following each class in art, I requested discussion time with the teacher. The majority of the interviews were audio-tape recorded. I attempted to make use of the time frame preceding and then follow-ing each lesson as a unique opportunity to follow a teacher's reasoning about what warranted one course of action over another. A l l the transcribed material was made available to the teachers and principals at vari-ous intervals throughout the study as a way of testing the adequacy of the descriptive ac-counts while the study was under way. The principal of one school read the entire transcripts accumulated at his school. Of the six teachers, three accepted my invitation to read the entire transcript pertaining to their work. Of those three, two spent an additional 62 three hours each, elaborating passages in the transcripts. Those who did not read the transcripts suggested to me either that they did not feel it was necessary, or that they did not have time since it was the end of the school year. In total, 28 one-hour audio-tapes were utilized in recording teacher talk. Transcripts of the tapes and field notes taken together filled over 600 typewritten pages of descriptive accounts. Part of the transcript of Teacher A and Teacher G are included for reference (Appendices A & B ) . Transcripts used in the study received only minor editing. My Role as a Participant Observer As a researcher, I took the stance that my degree of involvement with teachers in the field would have direct bearing on the outcome of the study. In attempting to gain first hand experience in the classroom, I learned the degree to which it was possible to partici-pate in it; that is, the degree to which I could assume tasks and responsibilities ordinarily undertaken by its members. I learned that my willingness to participate was limited to some extent by the degree of receptiveness of those in the field and the practicality of the situa-tions I encountered. To participate suggests to me direct involvement in a setting, talking to, questioning and observing people, and helping out as you learn about what they do. I should like to describe the extent to which this became possible. The ethnographic term participant observation suggests a degree of direct involvement in the field, underscoring my assumption that meaning could be uncovered more readily where there was a direct attempt to become involved in classroom events. I will describe possible levels of involvement as explained by Spradley (1980), and locate the level at which I was able to participate. Spradley represents involvement using the following categories: nonparticipation, passive participation, moderate participation and active participation. A re-searcher who falls in the category of nonparticipation has no direct involvement in the field either because of not wanting to participate, or perhaps the social situation does not permit it. A researcher who contributes to a classroom setting through passive participation does not interact to any great extent in the activities routinely categorized as teaching and learn-ing. A researcher who strives to maintain a balance between participation and observation is 63 termed a moderate participant. An active participant claims full membership and is able to do what the other members in the setting are doing. I would like to describe my role as one of a moderate participant. A researcher as a moderate participant strives to maintain a bal-ance between participation and observation (Spradley, 1980). Here the expectation was that I could observe, keep careful field notes, and strive to participate by undertaking small tasks assigned by a teacher but always without achieving the status of a teacher or student in the classroom. When a teacher was actively involved in teaching, I remained a passive observer, much the same as any student in the classroom. There was an advantage in this limited role, in that I was free to observe, take notes and tape record classroom interaction. Participant observation of this kind often begins with a feeling of detachment and either evolves or does not evolve into active participation. Over time, I found that I was becoming more involved in helping out in classroom events, and yet I was never to become an active participant in the full sense of the word. On such occasions when I actively participated I would mix paint, help children who wanted to talk about their work, set up materials for an art lesson, clean up afterwards, display children's work, button smocks, accept children's questions and complaints, and, along with the teacher, remind them of their teacher's ex-pectations of them. In spite of my limited role, my sense of rapport was firmly established most of the time. Teacher A told the class on one occasion, "Now, while we are getting the paper ready, the dishes ready, Miss Rafferty and I are going to work together on that, you are going to put on your shirts . . . " While I actively participated on almost all occasions to some extent, I was always conscious of how limited is the role of the ethnographer in the classroom. I realized that it was not possible for me to achieve full membership because I could achieve neither the status of full-time teacher nor student. My Role as Observer/Interviewer An ethnographer makes descriptive observations whenever she/he looks at a social sit-uation and attempts to record what is there. The purpose of observation in ethnography is to move toward the possibility of a descriptive account of the field by becoming increasingly more familiar with a setting and its members. Initially, one approaches a setting with a 64 general question in mind, "What is going on here?" (Spradley, 1980, p. 73). The strategy basic to this approach is the question-observation sequence. Observation is coterminous with questioning; I gain skill in observing as I gain skill in asking questions specific to a setting. Spradley (1980) found that observations, and the questions that result, can be reduced to two major types of observation: grand-tour observations and mini-tour observations. I will describe these two major types of observations and their significance to this study. Grand-Tour Observations. Here an ethnographer is led to an identification of the "major features" (Spradley, 1980, p. 77) of a scene. The ensuing grand-tour questions lead to a description of the major features encountered by a member or members of the field under study. Spradley says, "We can expand the idea of a grand-tour to include almost every aspect of experience in addition to spatial location." Grand-tour questions were intro-duced into my discussions with teachers in the time preceding and following an art lesson. For example, I had heard a teacher use the term "garbaging art" on a few occasions. I wanted to understand what she meant. Our dialogue unfolded as follows: P A T : You mentioned to me—we were talking about it while we were leaving class and we didn't get into a discussion about this—the reaction that the kids get when they take things home. Do you have any sense of the kind of reaction they get? T E A C H E R D : It's just from comments kids have made, like Joey when we made the necklaces said, "My Mum wouldn't like this, anyway. Everything I bring home goes in the garbage." Marilyn will say, "My Mum puts it on the fridge for three days. Then after three days I have to decide whether I want to keep it in my drawer of stuff or if it can go out. Then when summer time comes I'm allowed to pick five things from the year and the rest has to go out." Like the owls, two or three of the kids have come back and said, "My Mum really liked it," or, "My Mum wants the pattern for it," or "My Mum took it and we've got it framed and now it's hanging in my bedroom," and things like this. Just from verbal comments I wonder how it is accepted. This type of general question most often invited a teacher to topicalize the discussion in whatever way was comfortable for her. In turn, the elaboration suggested a further line of questioning. The purpose of this type of observation/questioning was to locate features identified by teachers as characteristic in some way of the art teaching task. 65 Mini-Tour Observations. Grand-tour observations, questions and descriptions lead to opportunities for moving toward the finer details of an experience; that is, Mini-tour obser-vations and questions lead to more specific information originally experienced at a general-ized level of knowing. This type of question acted like a probe generated in the circumstance at hand. Concentrated attention on features given in descriptive accounts encouraged me to search deeply for strategies a teacher uses to embed any feature in contextualized meaning. Where answers were not clearly available in a present account, further probing was done to draw out information. In the following excerpt, Teacher A attempts to tell me what a ["fin-ished job"] looks like in art and how a teacher is able to detect when art is finished. She used the term ["neat"] and I asked for clarification. P A T : I noticed that you said, "I don't know if it was Ryan who didn't fill in the little zigzags on the carnation." Is that what you mean by neat? T E A C H E R A : I think there is such a thing when you color of thinking of the shape you are working with. If you are coloring around it you are bring-ing out the shape. I am letting them experiment a lot in Grade one but, at the same time, I am trying to get them to see. Maybe I could teach it more as a lesson but I don't. Often, I try to let them feel it and see that how going around it brings out the shape. In this instance, probing about the term ["neat"] was one way of finding out about a ["finished job"]. The above practices will be elaborated next, as two schemes of interpreta-tion: the documentary method of interpretation and the interpretive procedures. Following a description of the documentary method of interpretation, the interpretative procedures will be empirically demonstrated to reveal how descriptive accounts and the strategies disclosed therein, structure events for teachers as well as for a researcher. The transcripts and my field notes, taken together, served as a resource for the empirical demonstrations in Chapter IV and the findings in Chapters V , VI and VII. Design of the Analysis of a Teacher's Accounting Practices The purpose of this section is the explication and demonstration of two interpretive schemes: (1) the documentary method of interpretation and (2) its constitutive practices, the interpretive procedures. These interpretive schemes are interdependent and 66 undifferentiated as they are a part of everyday life, and in this sense they are to be taken to be a person's method or strategy used to make sense of events. These schemes were used as resources to empirically demonstrate the availability of teachers' strategies in descriptive accounts. The Documentary Method of Interpretation. The meaning of any action, object or event including talk has a propensity for ambiguity. In answer to the question of how talk becomes understood in everyday life, Garfinkel (1967) holds that talk sustains meaning when it is indexed within an assembled context on an occasion. Locating a context in a classroom means discovering how a feature and a setting mutually elaborate one another. Garfinkel (1967), describes this process as the documentary method of interpretation when he says: The method consists of treating an actual appearance as "the document of", as "pointing to," as "standing on behalf of" a presupposed underlying pattern. Not only is the pattern derived from its individual documentary evidences, but the individual evidences, in their turn, are interpreted on the basis of "what is known" about the underlying pattern. Each is used to elaborate the other, (p. 78) For example, coloring in shapes in a regular way, while pacing the act of coloring over an allotted time, signifies to Teacher A how children can be seen doing a ["finished job"]. Through a kind of search a teacher documents that the present behavior of one child at work on his art can be seen as doing ["a finished job"]; that is, action in the setting and the feature ["a finished job"] mutually elaborate one another. Doing ["a finished job"] will be further disclosed later on as an important aspect of managing the pacing and phasing of art. Leiter (1980) says: The member connects the situational appearance of an object or event with the transcendent social scene by using the documentary method. When the member uses the present appearance of an object as the "document of" or "as pointing to" some underlying pattern, he accomplishes connectedness and, simultane-ously, the facticity of the object as an object in and of the social world, (p. 169) Mutual elaboration accepted as a teacher's strategy serves as a resource for me, the re-searcher, attempting to glimpse how art is made recognizable. The documentary method of interpretation operates as a strategy for whoever is trying to make sense of talk and behav-ior. The task for both the teacher and the researcher is to link any here-and-now with an 6 7 underlying pattern or scheme. For the researcher, a concerted effort is made to formulate this underlying pattern using available descriptive accounts given by a teacher. Any present appearance, such as an observed behavior, including talk, is referred to a pattern. Mannheim (1952) says, . . . documentary interpretation has the peculiarity that it must be performed anew in each period, and that any single interpretation is profoundly influenced by the location within the historical stream from which the interpreter attempts to reconstruct the spirit of a past epoch, (p. 61) In each classroom, as previously indicated, I accumulated an extensive number of transcripts and hand written notes which I attempted to make sense of as they became available. At each step of the reading of this material, interpretation for me was based on what was known about the art teaching task2 An underlying pattern began to emerge that provided me with a sense of who was involved, when and where it took place, what had to be done in what order, and indeed what would get done. Stated differently, repeated read-ings of the transcripts and my notes and sustained observation of classroom events revealed a coherent stock of knowledge which formed an advisory set of guidelines informing the teaching of art. This is not meant to suggest that teachers across the sample followed a preformulated curriculum determining classroom talk and behavior and governed by features in a normative way. Descriptive accounts, in which an orientation to the teaching of art is disclosed, are not taken to mean the following of rules in a literal sense. Rather, I take it that an accounting practice accomplishes the mutual elaboration of a set of guidelines and events in the setting. Teachers in the study were seen to use strategies to characterize events in respect to a programmed course of action and a complementary art classificatory scheme of possible activities. Features pertaining to a teachers' guidelines were recorded in my notes as follows: Finished product A-130-5 Following each descriptive term, ("Finished product" in the example), a letter was used to identify the transcript of a particular teacher. The sequence of numbers after a letter locates 2When I speak of the "art teaching task," I use this as a shorthand way of saying, "the view(s) of the teachers in the study of what constitutes the teaching and learning of art." 68 the page number and the line number in which the information is located in the transcript. Where a number of teachers made reference to the same feature, my record keeping appears as follows: Finished product A-140-3, A-150-4, B-60-7, C-160-3 For teachers in the study, a finished art product has a significant place in the teach-ing and learning of art. The following statement is one among several statements made by teachers which contextually elaborate what it means to talk about a finished product in art: Then you get a child who will do what they can that day, is rather slow at working and then they put it up and they don't even pick it up. I have to pick it up and say, "You know you never finished this. Could I have this finished?" There's that type and then the other one would be your child that works like Ben does, finishes it. It may not show the greatest artistic picture, but it is completed through it all. The notion of a ["finished product"] must be seen in the context of art as action program-med to fit a specific time frame. Children who ["will do what they can that day"], are ["rather slow"] and ["don't even pick it (art) up"] are typified as students who are rarely seen finishing their work along with the rest of the class. Thus, ["a finished product"] be-comes recognizable as an approved course of action in art. I wish to turn now to interpretive procedures as the constitutive practices of the doc-umentary method of interpretation. These practices are taken for granted by individuals in a setting. In using ethnomethodology as a theoretical grounding for this study, it is possible to demonstrate the unnoticed use of these practices in everyday life as a teacher's strategy for accomplishing the task. Interpretive Procedures. The focus of this section is the explication and demonstra-tion of the Interpretive Procedures as constituent practices of the documentary method of interpretation. An attempt is made here to make explicit the strategies used by a teacher to accomplish the art teaching task, which sustains an orientation to the teaching of art. It was stated earlier that the documentary method of interpretation presupposes a factual domain and that facticity is accomplished in a set of practices called interpretive procedures. It was argued that a teacher achieves an orientation in a situation by linking an observed behavior with an underlying pattern. Interpretive procedures were described in Chapter II as ways of 69 producing expectancies or idealizations arising in commonsense knowledge. The features found embedded in teachers' descriptive accounts in the present study were seen to arise and guide the art teaching task in respect to a programmatic course of action complemented by an art classificatory scheme. It seems appropriate at this point to specify that it was through the constitutive practices of the interpretive procedures that a teacher was able to bring significance to these features, and it is through the same practices that I was able to locate and examine the teachers stock of knowledge as a set of guidelines. Regarding the use of Interpretive Procedures as strategy makes them perceivable as a set of taken-for-granted assumptions; that is, through their demonstrated use in this Chap-ter, I am able to verify that in a process of commonsense reasoning, a teacher uses them to make observable to herself and others talk and behavior in an art classroom as part of an approved way of carrying out the task. The transcribed notes were read for each of four practices of the Interpretive Procedures. Passages were color coded where there was demon-strated use of one practice of the Interpretive Procedures. In demonstrating the practices of the Interpretive Procedures as they make recognizable an approved course of action in art, I am suggesting that I have verified their use by teachers as a set of practices. The demon-stration to follow illustrates the practices teachers use. Four practices, The Reciprocity of Perspective, Normal Form, The Et Cetera As-sumption, and Descriptive Accounts as Indexical Expressions will be discussed and their use demonstrated. The demonstration of these practices as separate strategies is done at a risk of obscuring their interdependence in everyday life. 1. The Reciprocity of Perspectives The reciprocity of perspectives takes the form of two properties to be discussed: the idealization of the interchangeability of standpoints and the idealization of the congruence of the system of relevances. a. The idealization of the interchangeability of standpoints: A speaker and hearer in in-teraction assume that if they were to change places they would see the same world 70 shared in common. Agreement among participants is invoked even though neither has indicated the explicit grounds that form a basis for agreement. Cicourel (1973, p. 34) says of this idealization, "The first part instructs the speaker and hearer to assume their mutual experiences of the interaction scene are the same even if they were to change places." b. The idealization of the congruency of the system of relevances: A speaker and hearer in interaction each with a unique biography takes for granted that until further notice their experiences are sufficiently similar so that they can ignore any differences. Members in a context assume of each other that descriptive accounts and utterances that assign meaning are reasonable and recognizable features of a social structure known in common and taken for granted. A teacher is operating under the assumption of the reciprocity of perspectives when she or he takes for granted that communication is taking place as usual and that the mean-ing conveyed is locally approved and known in common. Thus, a teacher treats the children and myself as participants in a shared in common situation. That is, we share membership in an institutional operation whose task is the teaching and learning of art. For example, Teacher A introduced a lesson on color. To begin, the Grade one chil-dren had drawn large geometric shapes on 14" x 18" pieces of paper following Teacher A's instructions. In the course of this lesson, she reviewed color mixing which had been the focus of instruction in a previous lesson in finger painting. First, I will present an excerpt, the dialogue of which was generated between the teacher and me as we discussed her read-ing of the transcript of the painting lesson. Following this excerpt I will present my analy-sis. T E A C H E R A : Yes, I was trying to get out the main primary colors. These were the three colors that other colors were made from. They were guess-ing big and little; you see, we had used them in fingerpainting. But that wasn't what I wanted. Then we had taken in language arts a compound word, so they said, "Oh, your special name is compound—you know children get miles from the topic. I said, "No, compound is when you put two words together and it makes a longer word." These have a spe-cial name and I told them the name "primary" and I remember the whole class said, "Oh"—it registered with them, so that's what that is about. I was trying to get a concept of primary colors and that we were using 71 primary colors again. "You want a paper to jot down notes?" PAT: No, that's fine, I have it on page 21 so 111 just refer back to that. T E A C H E R A : (reading the transcript out loud) "Alright." "Why did we call these primary colors . . . what was the reason?" "Because these colors you can use on special things." Then I said, "partly"—you seldom say to the children, "NO." I did back here, I said, "No, it wasn't a compound word," because you want to encourage them to keep telling you some-thing. So I said, "Well, partly, I suppose that's special in a way. What would you say, Tamara?" "It's when you mix them up that they turn into different colors." You see, she got the idea perfectly. When we put two of these together we get a third and I understand that when we mixed the blue and the yellow we got green. So we really were able to use three colors in fingerpainting. Well, I had only allowed them to use two that were mixed to produce the third. "Does that make it clear, is that making sense?" When the children answered incorrectly on color they were saying that they recognized the mandate to respond but not the question being asked. While the children did not under-stand the concept ["primary colors"] they did understand their responsibility to sustain an approved course of action. Teacher A invites me to share in a viewpoint that establishes what anybody in a similar situation would know. The children had answered incorrectly. ["They were guessing big and little, you see."] Her use of ["You see"] suggests that she is inviting me as a participant to share in the understanding that it's not an unusual situation when [" . . . children get miles from the topic"]. Also implicit in this episode is the as-sumption that imputing a difference in disposition ["children get miles from the topic"] clearly explains how some children are able to arrive at a different interpretation of a fac-tual event ["three colors that other colors were made from"]. In this situation Teacher A also makes note of my presence as a participant who would be able to make sense of what she had to do ["Does that.make it clear, is that mak-ing sense?"]. There is the assumption that extensive reference to the same topic in dialogue will firmly establish that there is shared meaning. This was exemplified earlier in the state-ment ["so that's what that is about"]. The latter statement by the teacher is made to elicit from me some assurance of the sensibility of, and recognizability of, what is being said. The implication is that a world known in common is the basis for this dialogue. The implication is that, to some extent, I have achieved membership in the setting. 72 In the next excerpt, again exemplifying the reciprocity of perspectives, Teacher F dis-closes that choice of art activities is related to what it takes to maintain classroom order as an approved course of action. T E A C H E R F : In one way, I feel that I have not taken these students as far as they could go. Well, I haven't tried by any means. In the way of crafts we haven't done all that much. That is partly because I'm scared of get-ting bits and pieces all over the place and losing them in between classes because of not being up there any other time of the week, you know. A l -though it's a very good class, I mean I've got no excuse, I'm sure they could have handled it. I couldn't handle it. I sort of 'chickened out' on doing things like batique, paper mache or easy things they probably would have liked and done a good job on. We didn't do them. I never went, really, into any of those things that I think they could have done and may have enjoyed. P A T : Could you tell me a little bit more? Another teacher has mentioned something similar. I want to see if I'm on the right track and following you. I gather you are saying there are a certain number of things you would have liked to have tried but you were too 'chicken' to. T E A C H E R F : Yes, but I was too chicken. I thought I didn't know if I could handle the organization of all that, the mess in the classroom when it is not even my classroom, or, in my case, being sure I know how to do it so if anything goes wrong I can help them. This class is a very good class but, still, you wouldn't like to have to stand back and say, "Well, you have made a mess of it and that's tough because I don't know what to do about it." I like to choose things that there is not so much that can go wrong and that, as I say, is me being too cautious and too loath to take any risks. They would have taken them and made good results. P A T : What you are saying is that you are being cautious but with reason to be. T E A C H E R F : I think, very much personal reason. You know what I mean? Almost saying to myself, "What can you manage to do?" Then I put it at a very low level. In this episode Teacher F tells me that some art projects are disruptive of the organi-zational structure of the school. Teacher F uses an imputed biography ["I'm scared"], ["I was too chicken"], ["too loath to take any risks"] as motives that account for a reluctance to do craft projects ["I sort of chickened out on doing things like batik, paper mtche or easy things they probably would have liked and done a good job on"]. Despite this limita-tion, she sustains the reasonableness of what she does ["I like to choose things that there is not so much that can go wrong . . ."] . Teacher F labels her reasons ["personal reasons"], what she is able to ["manage to do"], and concludes ["You know what I mean?"]. This 73 final statement appears to indicate that Teacher F is inviting me to share in a way of rea-soning that actively recognizes the constraints of some kinds of art activities. 2. Normal Form As a property, Normal Form instructs the individual to expect and require that in in-teraction the members will provide intelligible talk and behavior. Leiter (1980, p. 174) de-scribes this practice as an assumption by the individual of a body of knowledge shared in common. Individuals in a context rely on there being acceptable forms of talk and action that are useful and essential in assigning meaning to experience. When discrepancies occur in a context, knowledge it is assumed, is available for restoring an experience to acceptable form. When the teachers, children and I as participants of the school setting, expect or as-sume that the other shares a common understanding, there is present in talk one or more "normal form." A study of everyday talk and action can be used to reveal tacit knowledge taken to be part of common knowledge. As indicated, teachers in the study used strategies which accounted for adherence to the programmed character of art and an art classificatory scheme. In the first excerpt, Teacher F discloses normal form knowledge of how art should proceed and how, in her circumstances, adverse conditions work against particular kinds of art activities. T E A C H E R F : This is thirty [minutes]. By the time I get up there—you see, I have a class right before it and I am down here. I usually can't be both-ered to lug all my books upstairs so I dash to bring them back down here [to the library]. Then I go upstairs. By the time I'm in there it must be at least five to instead of ten to. Then, by the time you've got started on it, it is two o'clock. Then in twenty minutes, by that time, they are supposed to be on their break. If it is something they have to clear up, you've got almost less than twenty minutes to actually work on anything. It is a very poor period. Teacher F works as part-time librarian as well as teaching art and language arts. In the short time allotted to art in her timetable, she attempts to sustain the situation as art as usual. To do this requires careful direction of the children in what they are to do. Arriving in class at five to two, it takes five minutes to get the class ready, ["Then, by the time you've got started on it, it is two o'clock."] There is an indication here that the good 74 teacher of art is one who is able to select art activities that will get this work done effec-tively and on time. ["Then in twenty minutes, by that time, they are supposed to be on their break."]. In discussing time constraints imposed on her work, Teacher F's account re-veals her understanding of how an art class is to proceed given the constraints of an exter-nally imposed timetable. We begin to understand what constitutes a properly programmed art class as we apprehend the importance of pacing and phasing action over time in a con-certed way. The next example is intended to demonstrate how teachers view their task as one of sustaining the sense of an art classificatory scheme of possible art activities open to choice: P A T : How do you go about picking art? T E A C H E R E : Okay, I guess partly I keep in mind the season. In Fall you often think of leaves and collecting leaves and doing a collage with leaves and tissue and such. Tissue paper leaves for the window because it is col-orful and brightens up the room and some of it is what ever is big and bright and is fun in doing and decorates the room. I like to have lots of their work around so it feels like their room. So, the seasons, occasions and then in between time just projects that I think will be fun. Teacher E's response ["Okay"] suggests that she acknowledges the reasonableness of a re-quest to talk about how the art program is organized. There is an assumption of a body of knowledge shared in common. Her comment, ["So, the seasons, occasions and then in be-tween time just projects that I think will be fun"] takes for granted my understanding that seasonal events and special occasions is a commonly accepted device for organizing art cur-ricula. Her remark ["between time just projects"] reveals a second classification of art activities fitted around the first organizational scheme. Taken together these comprise for Teacher E an art classificatory scheme of possible activities open to choice. In the two examples given above, I have attempted to display strategies a teacher uses to make recognizable art as a programmatic action and a classificatory scheme of kinds of art activities. These features of the task will be taken up for further discussion in Chapters V , VI and VII. 75 3. The Et Cetera Assumption In sustaining a sense of the normal form appearance of talk in everyday life, intended meanings sometimes go unstated. Despite their vagueness, talk and behavior are let pass or are granted as being sufficiently understood. An individual is able to let things pass in con-versation by means of the following assumptions: The hearer can fill in unstated but intended meaning during an ongoing ex-change of conversation. A speaker in conversation will at some point elaborate or say something in con-versation that will clarify a situation. Descriptive accounts contain vague, ambiguous and unclear utterances, as if offered with the anticipation that a hearer can fill in unstated meaning. As well, the hearer waits for the speaker to eventually say something that fills in unclear meaning. As well, past re-marks can presently be used to clarify present utterances. Garfinkel (1967) suggested we re-gard this procedure as a strategy whereby an individual creates and sustains a sense of the object or event as factual. While the experience of the interpretive procedures is seen as strategy, Garfinkel viewed the procedures as taken for granted but unnoticed in everyday life. In this sense an individual assumes the existence of a world known in common. These assumptions are in operation in a classroom setting when a teacher's talk and action has embedded in it specialized knowledge that is not elaborated by her on each occasion of its use. Furthermore they are in operation when members in the setting do not request clarifi-cation of talk and action but assume that further elaboration will arise somehow. I will present two instances of the use of these assumptions. In the first example, Teacher D and I talk about children who throw their art in the garbage can after art class. Teacher D suggests that frequently the children and their parents garbage school art. I wished to find out the kind of reasoning that teachers do to justify this behavior. I don't know if it makes any difference coming from single parent homes or whole families. Like Joey, he's from a broken family, and all his stuff goes in the garbage. Jimmy doesn't take any of his stuff home either and there are family problems there. Social Services have been called on that one for child neglect. He's another one that doesn't take anything home. 76 Teacher D observes that sometimes children do not want to take their art home. "It's just from comments kids have made, like Jason made when we made the bracelets said, 'My mum wouldn't like this anyway. Everything I bring home goes in the garbage'." In reasoning why children throw their art away, Teacher D in retrospect calls up normal form knowledge from psychology. ["I don't know if it makes any difference coming from single parent homes or whole families. Like Jason, he's from a broken family, and all his stuff goes in the garbage."] What is disclosed here is the relationship made between garbaging art and a disposition children acquire when families break up. Teacher D does not clarify what she is getting at when she uses ["single parent homes"] and ["a broken family"] to account for children throwing their art away. There is an assumption that I am able to make the con-nection and that the reasons she is able to assign are considerations which have been rele-vant in the past and are enforceable once more. Furthermore, although the dialogue continued in this context, I did not ask for clarification that would help me to understand the relationship between the children's seeming attitude about their art and Teacher D's rea-soning. This suggests my own everyday reliance on filling-in the meaning and waiting for a later remark of the teacher which would elaborate what is meant when one says, ["single parent homes"]. Teacher D did not seem to feel the necessity of clarifying her remarks. In the second excerpt, Teacher D had turned attention to Mark a number of times asking him to pay attention and stop bothering other children. Mark persisted in moving away from his desk on a number of occasions, thereby disrupting the pace and flow of events. T E A C H E R D : He wants to talk or touch you or stand right beside you. Any excuse to come up and ask you a question whether it's for a drink or to go to the bathroom or to help him with a question or to help him clean his desk. It's just continual "Do for me." By the end of the day I've had enough "Do for me." Do for yourself for awhile. P A T : Is his work good? T E A C H E R D : No, he's very low, very weak. P A T : In Art? T E A C H E R D : In Art . 77 P A T : Compared with other subjects? T E A C H E R D : I suppose it is about average compared to the rest of his work. It's very immature for a Grade three student. Even his perception, I don't know, I haven't had them draw faces, but I get the feeling he may even forget certain parts like they do in Grade one. PAT: Oh, he's still operating. . . T E A C H E R D : Mhmm, he's still a year delayed, maybe two years delayed. Teacher D observes that Mark is uncooperative in the classroom ["It's just continual 'Do for me.' By the end of the day I've had enough 'Do for me.' Do for yourself for awhile."] She describes Mark and his work as ["very low, very weak"], ["average"], ["very immature for a Grade three student"]. Here Teacher D imputes a difference in Mark's biog-raphy ["very immature for a Grade three student"] to account for why he is uncooperative in the classroom. Teacher D assumes that as a participant of the classroom setting I am able to make a connection between the behavior of Mark and her reasoning about the char-acter of his disposition ["very immature"] compared to other Grade three children. In interacting with Teacher D , I did not ask her what she meant when she characterized the child as immature. Neither did I ask for a connection between his immaturity and the be-havior we observed. Use of the phrase ["Oh, he's still operating"] suggests my method of imputing to Mark ["operating"] as normal form. This descriptive expression was used by me to attempt to elaborate Teacher D's account of the child's behavior as conditioned by a de-velopmental stage of operation. It can be noted also that Teacher D seemed to take for granted the descriptive expression ["operating"] when she didn't wait for me to finish speaking. 4. Descriptive Accounts as Indexical Expressions Indexical expressions instruct an individual to connect a feature produced in talk to an underlying pattern. Typically, when a teacher uses an expression there is a movement be-yond dictionary meaning to link the expression to the occasion at hand, features of the set-ting, the intentions of the participants of the setting and/or specialized knowledge. In connecting a feature with an underlying pattern in a particular setting, context affects the 78 meaning. Thus we can say that descriptive accounts are tied for their meaning to context. Garfinkel (1967) found it useful to refer to this process as the reflexivity of accounts. As elaborated in Chapter II, indexical and reflexive properties inherent in all features mean that these same features and the setting in which they are produced, mutually elaborate one an-other. I will provide two excerpts which demonstrate indexicality and reflexivity. In the first example, Teacher C and I talk about a drawing activity done with her Grade three class. I had begun to understand that the use of the terms finished art or finishing art is correlated with children's ability to pace an art activity over the time designated for art. This is meant to suggest that the indexical meaning of the term finished or finishing can be understood in the context of the task of synchronizing action with the time allotted for art. Seeing this mutual elaboration of meaning in descriptive accounts reveals its reflexivity. P A T : But little Michella—I noticed her today. She finished her drawing. She had done hers without help in any way and then she said to me, "I am doing another one," and she started another. T E A C H E R C : She is a competent worker and it is very interesting. She is a year older. She repeated and there is a split in her family. She and one brother repeated and one did not. At the beginnning of the year she was quite socially dependent on me and the mother realized this but she is weaning away from me now but she has done remarkably well with what she has got to work with. She is competent and tends to what she is doing. At first I thought it was just to please me but you know she was working without showing me all the time now and she is working on her own which is my aim is to try to get people to, once the path is set, to work on their own to the greatest extent possible. You see Jay and Michael go off in a corner and work on their own once the task is set. After listening to Teacher C discuss children who frequently did not complete an art project, I observed that Michella had finished her project and was one of the few children who was able to begin a second one. ["She finished her drawing and then she said to me, 'I am doing another one'."] Teacher C acknowledges my observations using the following con-text to account for Michella's behavior: ["She is a competent worker"]. Teacher C ascribes to Michella qualities that account for her competence. Michella has overcome what is indi-cated as an undesirable disposition where she was observed to be ["socially dependent"]. Features such as ["working without showing me all the time"], ["tends to what she is 79 doing"], and ["is working on her own"] suggest how it is that Michella can be seen as com-petent in pacing and phasing her action to an expected finish. These phrases help us to un-derstand what it means to be competent at finishing art. Teacher E introduced to me the descriptive expression ["tracer"]. This term standing on its own provides little insight into its intended meaning. Like the term ["finished"], it re-quires that we see how Teacher E assembled a context. T E A C H E R E : I guess my main idea is if a child is going to be so insecure that he won't even try anything at all, I would rather give him a tracer and let him accomplish something. What I have found, it has been my experi-ence, that if 1 start out the beginning of the year where they don't know me and they don't trust me, I've got to earn that trust. We've come to art and if they've had bad experiences because they think they can't do it, I'm saying, "Okay, start off easy." It is like having training wheels on your bicycle to me—nobody would expect you to automatically ride a two wheeler. If you're comfortable why not learn with training wheels—if using a tracer can give them a sense of security and yes I can do it—I wouldn't use them exclusively; like I say, we start out with God's eyes where it is totally creative and then we'll maybe use the leaves where they use the tracers. Then we'll do something else with paint where there is no tracers. P A T : You seem to be telling me there is a practical . . . T E A C H E R E : I think there is a time. It is like a drug I suppose—drugs can be abused or they can be used to benefit your health, to help your health and I think it is the same with something like a tracer—you can use it to help you from time to time and not abuse it. I would never say everytime we do something, "Here are the tracers, trace this so everything looks perfect." I wouldn't do that, but I can feel for where they are coming, and being afraid to try something, and sometimes it just takes that little bit of "Oh, yeah, I can do it, that wasn't so hard after a l l , " and then they will try. As I say, I found a lot of times they'll go ahead then and say, "Oh, yeah, well, I want to draw a leaf like this." Then they'll go ahead and draw their own. P A T : It just occurred to me—what do you mean by a tracer? I think I know what you mean. T E A C H E R E : A piece of manila or whatever in the shape of leaves. I keep coming back to the Wugie. [Wugie is a popular cartoon figure of an owl that was used as a mascot for a summer games sports event.] A tracer is revealed to be more than ["A piece of manila or whatever in the shape of leaves."] Teacher E's use of expressions such as ["insecure"], ["won't even try anything at all"], ["afraid"], ["they've had bad experiences because they think they can't do it . . ."] justifies the use of ["tracers"] on the grounds that these characteristics of children can be 8 0 seen inhibiting their involvement in art. Furthermore, expressions such as ["try"] and ["ac-complish something"] help us to understand that tracers are instrumental in the success of the art teaching task as well. Children who ["try"] and ["accomplish something"] are seen complying with the mandate to concert their action with the rest of the class. Thus, tracers become a way of getting the subject Art accomplished. As a way of concluding, I would like to suggest that the expressions ["try"] and ["accomplish something"], provide me with a way of understanding ["tracer"] and conversely ["tracer"] gives meaning to the foremen-tioned expressions when heard in the assembled context of the case described. This process wherein a feature and an assembled context mutually determine one another is what Garfinkel referred to as the reflexivity of accounts. Summary In this chapter, I attempted to provide background information on teachers participat-ing in the present study. Gaining entry into the field and strategic involvement in the every-day life of the art classroom were described. Central to Chapter IV was the explication and demonstration of two interpretive schemes: the documentary method of interpretation and its constitutive practices, the inter-pretive procedures which are the fundamental practices informing the findings reported in Chapters V , VI and VII. An empirical demonstration was undertaken to reveal how descrip-tive accounts as strategies of teachers repeatedly and socially structure events for them and operate as a resource for the study. Four practices of interpretive procedures were demon-strated: The Reciprocity of Perspectives, Normal Form, the Et Cetera Assumption and Descriptive Accounts as Indexical Expressions. Talk, in the form of descriptive accounts, disclosed meaning by viewing it as an assembled context. Locating a context was taken to mean discovering how a feature and the setting in which it appears mutually elaborate one another. The discovery of this mutual elaboration in the transcribed notes served as a re-source in describing the art teaching task. Careful examination of the features revealed an underlying pattern which operates as a schema or set of guidelines informing the art 81 teaching task. Chapter V will undertake a description of a set of teacher disclosed guidelines. Chapter VI will attempt to demonstrate how teachers make use of these guidelines to make recognizable what goes on in art as an approved course of action: Taken together Chapters V and VI constitute the findings of the present study. 82 CHAPTER V FINDINGS: SOURCES OF KNOWLEDGE INFORMING THE ART TEACHING TASK Introduction To say that a teacher has acquired a schema or point of reference informing the art teaching task means that, upon analysis of their descriptive accounts, teachers were found to have a coherent stock of knowledge that formed an advisory set of guidelines making recognizable action in art as an approved course of action. Chapter V will describe the art teaching task as advised by this set of guidelines which teachers consult whenever the teaching and learning of art takes place. This underlying pat-tern provides the backdrop informing strategies teachers used in preserving the routine flow of work in the classroom. In Chapter VI an attempt will be made to demonstrate that teachers endeavor to manage their work with respect to locally approved guidelines while faced with an array of contingencies arising in their particular setting. Contingencies here refer to features in a situation which require effort on the teacher's part to initiate and sustain an approved way of teaching and learning art. As a way of introduction, the description which immediately follows elaborates in a broad sociocultural context institutional expectations brought to bear on the role of the ele-mentary school teacher who teaches art. It serves simply to introduce the teacher's field of action as a prestructured field in the sense that a teacher finds herself or himself more moved by it than it is by her or him. The description to follow has been prompted by teachers' descriptive accounts of their task as manager over or strategist in classroom affairs as well as their accounts of the subject Art. It briefly sketches a perspective from which one can gain a purview of the guidelines informing the art teaching task which will follow it, and it should not be misconstrued as part of teachers' accounts which formed the data base 83 of the present study. The Institutional Setting Informing the Art Teaching Task It is the expectation of the Program of Studies: Curriculum, Alberta Education (1982) that the citizens of the Province of Alberta be provided with the opportunity to study and learn in the subjects Language Arts, Mathematics, Science, Social Studies, Fine Arts (Art and Music), Health, and Physical Education. According to the Program of Studies a deci-sion to recommend minimum times (see Appendix C) for the various subjects has been taken for the following reasons: 1. time guidelines provide some indication of the importance to be attached to the various components of the Elementary School Program; 2. the recommended times provide a frame of reference for curriculum developers; and 3. they provide guidelines for teachers and principals in educational plan-ning. While a school may decide to increase the suggested time allocation for a subject, the Pro-gram of Studies recommends that a subject not be offered for less than the recommended time. To quote, "one would expect that decisions to schedule subjects for less than the min-imum recommended times must be well documented" (1982, p. vi i) . Upon checking with school trustees whose members participated in this study, it was learned that 150 minutes per week is the combined time routinely given for art and music. While 70 minutes was a suggested allocation of time given for art reported by school principals (Appendix D ) , it was found that children on actual occasion received approximately 30 minutes contact time in the subject art. Being able to manage instruction efficiently and effectively in all the designated subject areas within the organizational arrangement of the school timetable is a taken-for-granted condition of employment. The obligation to fulfill this provincial mandate is independent of the personal wishes of teachers, students, parents, or school personnel at the elementary grade level. Other specifications regarding the designated content of school subjects are organized in the form of curriculum guides compiled and disseminated by the Department of Education of the Province of Alberta. Two of these, the Art Curriculum 84 Guide, Department of Education, the Province of Alberta (1969) and the Handbook for Practicum Programs in the Elementary Schools (1985-1986) will be referred to here as au-thoritative statements meant to guide action related to organizational routines and proce-dures as well as the subject art. The Art Curriculum Guide, Department of Education, the Province of Alberta (1969) attempts to predetermine to some extent the elements of a comprehensive and sequential art program. It supports a theoretical stance that sees instruction in art as having two predeter-mined foci: creating art and understanding art. The Guide states, "This decision is not ca-pricious; it should be clear that understanding of the nature and variety of art is of equal importance to creating art products" (p. 1). It recommends that teachers introduce skills in drawing, painting, printmaking, sculpture and fabric decoration, attending to the perceptual development of the child through exercises in observing, describing, and depicting design elements. Clearly evident in this recommendation is the expectation that art teaching will foster an understanding of art as more than the production of art products. However, it should be pointed out that 75% of the text is given to describing techniques, materials, and resources in the doing of art, with an emphasis on freedom to experiment with techniques, materials, and resources. Implicit in the goals of the Guide is the understanding that a teacher should be able to make informed choices and take concerted action in line with the expectations of the Guide, "It is recommended that a teacher plan units around areas in art which are most at-tractive to and understood by the teacher himself" (p. 43). Through comments made by teachers and through the researcher's personal observation it was found that teachers in the study did not consult the Guide in a routine and regular way, although they acknowledged having read it. For example, Teacher F commented, "I tried to follow that and I found that very difficult to do with them." Teachers in the study were uncertain as to the extent to which the art curriculum guide was being used by other teachers. In one circumstance I asked Teacher A if she be-lieved that it was important to go beyond art making to teach children concepts of color 85 advocated by the Guide: I was taught in the old school about the color circle . . . I don't know if other teachers use it, I'm not sure it's in any art directive or anything. When the Guide states, "It is recommended that a teacher plan units around areas in art which are most attractive to and understood by the teacher himself," it appears that the teacher of art is expected to manage the weekly task of teaching art as a competent member of the staff of the school; that is, there is an expectation that art can be taught regardless of actual conditions in the classroom. For example, implicit in the above statement is the understanding that a teacher should not omit the subject art from the school timetable in a case where one does not feel prepared to teach art or when viewed in terms of classroom organization and management one would prefer not to have to contend with it. The Council of Ministers of Education, Canada in a 1983 survey entitled, A Survey of Provincial Curricula at the Elementary and Secondary Levels (1983) concluded that, "In elementary arts classes, few teachers have specialized training" (1983, p. 18). At present all teachers in teacher training institutions in Alberta receive generalist certification, requiring an introductory course in art education. There are no legislated requirements for study in art education beyond this minimum requirement. Since its inception in 1980, the present generalist program in Elementary Education at the University of Alberta requires students to undertake one 3-credit course in art educa-tion. Prior to the introduction of the generalist program and between 1972 and 1979, teacher training in art education was optional for students enrolled in the Elementary Education program at the University of Alberta. Departmental statistics compiled by the Office of Institutional Research and Planning of the University of Alberta (Appendix E) show that between 1976 and 1979 the proportion of university students enrolled in introductory courses in art education (199) was significantly lower than other subject areas such as mathematics education (320) and reading education (657). Of the six teachers participating in the present study five had taken the equivalent of one 3-credit teacher training course in art education. Teacher F had not received teacher training in art education. 86 Another significant knowledge base informing the art teaching task is contained in the Handbook for Practicum Programs in the Elementary Schools (1985-1986). It is introduced here as a way of making apparent that aspect of the teacher's task having to do with the management of classroom organizational routines and procedures. Teachers are responsible not only for subject matter content, as indicated above, but also for the orderly manage-ment of an aggregate of children whose action must be seen conforming to the expectations of the school timetable and the physical resources that are an essential part of schooling. We will refer to this synthesis as the programmatic character of the school subject Art. The Practicum Program as part of teacher training at the University of Alberta is im-plemented with the expectation that student teachers can be brought to know and practice generic principles of classroom organization and management. The Handbook for Practicum Programs in the Elementary Schools attempts to make explicit what it means to assume full classroom responsibilities as a professional teacher: determine which teaching strategies most appropriately achieve the objectives, provide a stimulating initiating activity to motivate pupil interest, emphasize main ideas, design activities which encourage maximum student participation. Active involve-ment is the key to effective learning, assign sufficient time to each segment of the lesson, provide an effective closure. (1985-1986, p. 31) Implied in the above statement is a requirement for the linear progression of action in con-cert with the various segments of the school day. For art this synchronization of action over a designated time period with a respect for the physical order of the classroom stands to represent competent management of the art teaching task. The Handbook goes on to explain the teacher's task: Effective routines contribute significantly to the smooth operation of any class-room and unless you pay particular attention to their operation you may not even be aware of them. Without this awareness you may run into difficulties handling procedures that your students normally take for granted. In general you should follow the established routines of the class with which you are working, (p. 73) Implied in the above statement is a recognition of the requirement to recognize strategies useful in sustaining the programmatic character of art in a way that members of the school 87 have come to expect. The imperative nature of the matter of acquiring generic principles of organization and management is in evidence when student teachers are evaluated for course credit purposes (Appendix F) by the classroom teacher and university personnel using a checklist to indicate quality of performance. Ability to sustain classroom organizational routines and procedures is a patent consideration informing anyone who cares to assess the quality of life in general in the classroom. While the Handbook makes explicit statements of expectations for classroom manage-ment, teachers suggest that it is only in the context of the school that they learn the full intent of statements such as those mentioned above. That is, it is in the practical circum-stances of the classroom, where the principles of organization and management are managed in relationship to the subject Art that teachers learn the full intent of sustaining its programmatic character. It was Teacher G's first year of teaching art, and I asked her what that was like: Maybe the hardest thing was coming and not knowing the kids, figuring out a seating plan, putting troublemakers together when I didn't know I was doing it. Then, for something like that, I would talk to the teachers of last year and say, "Who gets in trouble? Who should not be put beside so-and-so?" They would tell me so I rearranged them all. That part worked out fine. To reiterate, while the Handbook and the various teacher training courses which elab-orate its content attempt to project a concept of the governing sense of the teaching task as action programmed over a designated time frame, it is in the practical circumstances of the school setting that a teacher learns what it means to create a well organized and managed effect while simultaneously contending with any one school subject. In summary, teachers are conceived as people who have a mandate to find their way within the organizational arrangement of the school. Attuned to the possibility of failure, concerns are directed not only to the school subjects but to classroom management as well, as it is inextricably tied to what can be seen getting done. As figures on public display teachers are under pressure to perform adequately, as their action is followed in close scru-tiny by parents, children and school personnel. Knowing that unfavorable conditions can 88 arise, they are aware of a presumed risk in carrying out their work. Over a period of time in the classroom a teacher develops an appreciation of the practical circumstances of the school, the demands of its timetable, and its physical re-sources as externally imposed elements affecting the undertaking of art. That is, no matter what the circumstance, a teacher must be seen to develop a sense of competence in a setting where all the legislated subjects must be seen being taught in a programmed fashion within and between subjects. The possibility of a display of incompetence due to the inability of a teacher to acquire extensive formal training in art education and to bring it in line with the institutional expectations of the school decreases as a teacher acquires an orientation in the classroom and begins to use this acquired stock of knowledge to guide the teaching of art. Thus, it can be concluded that the smooth operation of the art teaching task embodies presumptions about organizational routines and procedures as well as about the subject art. Teachers find out about the facts of the art teaching task as they gain experi-ence in managing the classroom. Whenever teachers undertake the subject art within a spe-cified time frame, with consideration for how long an art activity takes and the risk of unexpected problems, they consult personally developed guidelines acquired over time which view the task of teaching art as synonymous with classroom organization and management. The above discussion made reference to two seemingly autonomous systems of au-thority which teachers in the study were found to consult in deciding the relevance of ob-jects, actions and events in the art classroom. The description to follow was given in teachers' accounts as a schema or an advisory set of guidelines comprising knowledge of or-ganizational routines and procedures as well as the subject art. In the next chapter this knowledge base, sustained as a set of guidelines by the teacher, will provide a backdrop against which teacher strategies in sustaining the orderliness of art teaching and learning are discussed. 89 Teacher Asserted Knowledge as Guidelines for the Art Teaching Task As indicated, two aspects of the art teaching task operate as advisory sets of guidelines and are consulted by teachers as they attend to their work. The present study found that guidelines were (1) derived from an awareness of the need for a programmed course of action and (2) based on an art classificatory scheme. These are consulted and brought into mutual relationship to each other in order to establish what is recognizable and normal in actual practice. That the teaching and learning of art become recognizable as such is a result of the teachers' background, the current context and assumptions about what is believed to be the good teacher of art. The features of a teacher's stock of knowledge are described here in a manner that regards its structure as an important tool in a teacher's strategy or way of thinking. As two aspects of an organizational scheme which teachers consult, these two knowledge bases serve as powerful considerations in deciding among alternative courses of action. While the knowledge informing the task as it is described here is general in character, it is in the context of the actual setting that specificity of meaning becomes established. That is, features of the teaching task take on relevance in connection with practical circumstances arising in the classroom setting. In chapter VI, I will elaborate on this notion of level of specificity and bring the reader closer to the setting by disclosing strategies used by teachers in contending with conditions arising in actual classroom practice. Programmed Action The school timetable exemplifying an aggregate course of action organized over the school day, and the maintenance of the physical setting and its members in respect to this action are the foci of operation for teachers. These two aspects of a teacher's classroom knowledge are expected to be studied and organized by them to accommodate the orderly flow of the teaching and learning process. The principal factor governing the teaching of art is the requirement that the school day and the day's work come to an acceptable end at a given time and in substantial order; that is, that the outcome of action in any subject area be ordered in terms of the limitations of time and organizational resources available. Specifically, the task of the teacher of art is to find a set of operations or guidelines to 90 intervene between children whose presence is anticipated each day and the expectation of the institution that their conduct as an aggregate can and should be made to respond in a pre-dictable and approved fashion. The description to follow of the programmatic character of events as they pertain to art was acquired through observation and discussion with teachers and reflects the emphasis given to it by teachers. While it might appear commonplace to people familiar with the ele-mentary school setting, it is meant to heighten awareness of dimensions of the teaching task: specifically, its temporal coordination in respect to the school day and the organiza-tion of physical resources which come into play in the pacing and phasing of sequences of action. An awareness of when one is obliged to engage in the collective act of attending to a teacher's whole-class presentation gives evidence of children's acquired knowledge of the programmatic character of the school day. In the course of attending school, children ap-pear to acquire knowledge of the inter- and intra-subject sequencing of concerted action constituting typical and formal teaching. Activities not directly related to this program may be attended to by children between subjects, at recess time, and before and after school. When a teacher begins a whole-class presentation, however, children are expected to be at their desks and attentive to what is presented. A whole-class presentation sets off a sequence of teacher oriented actions taking up to ten minutes to complete and given only once per lesson: T E A C H E R F : I brought some bags here—Safeway bags. Do you remember the idea? I think I mentioned it to you last week, on making some kind of a mask? Listen carefully then. I'll say it once and then you can get started. Assumed in this introductory segment of the task is the understanding that the instructions for the seat work assignment to follow can be gone over only once and that children should seek out cues in the presentation to guide them toward appropriate behavior in getting ["started"]. Given only once, instructions have to be adequate enough to get the work done. Whether to enter into an art activity following a large-group presentation is not open to choice. 91 Once an activity in art is initiated in a large-group presentation, it is followed through. In no case did I observe a teacher's presentation being discontinued. This does not mean to say incidents do not arise to challenge the presentation. Teachers were found rou-tinely managing resources including its members in order to sustain the intended work of the large-group presentation. It is important to a teacher that the entire class as an aggre-gate of 20 or more children hear the same instructions and enter cooperatively into synchronizing their action in an approved way. A teacher's movement from one stationary location where whole-class presentations are given to another location as the children begin to work, serves as a pacing mechanism signaling to the children that they should turn their attention to assigned seat work. This transition, when it is accomplished without an inordinate number of interruptions, is testi-mony to a teacher's skill in signaling a switch from her presentation to the children's assigned work; that is, movement is synchronized from one segment of a sequence of actions to another. It is critical that this transition run smoothly to sustain collective in-volvement in making recognizable the orderliness of art. Seat work assignments generally take up to 20 minutes or approximately 65% of con-tact time in the subject Art. Art activities are preferred which ensure the teacher that the children will be able to follow directions independently of her having to constantly supervise each seat work assignment. Teacher F and I looked toward the children as they worked on their art. She commented, "It's nice to see that most of them are working . . ." Because of the impossibility of spending time with each child during the art class, an ideal situation ex-ists when a child acquires knowledge of the advisory nature of art as programmed action and does not require an inordinate amount of individual attention to bring his or her be-havior in line with the class. T E A C H E R G : Jody is really, really good at art. For him to come and ask for help is something. He'd never ask because he's so good. Like today, he said "I can't think of anything." He was stuck so he came and asked. Children whose behavior complies with what is intended in art are viewed as sustaining the aggregate flow of work, and consequently, like Jody, they are seen to be making an effort. 92 Compliance with large-group presentations is essential in sustaining an aggregate flow of action. A child's response to a seat work assignment, if regarded as inappropriate, might be interrupted to reinforce with her or him correct conduct in the task environment. Teacher A says: I have in my teaching stopped a child who just wasn't following the regula-tions. They missed out on the whole exercise which some might say isn't the best idea, but I think there comes a time, and then they know you mean busi-ness. Then the next time you can all paint happily. In this case Teacher A asserts the priority given to a sense of order in the art classroom. Children who are unable or unwilling to accommodate their behavior to the intended activities given in a whole-group presentation are seen to threaten the integration of the ebb and flow of events. Children become aware that they are being monitored closely to see that they are attending to tasks set out for them. It is the teacher who decides what activities will be tolerated. Teacher D observes that the apparent unwillingness of one child to concert his action can be attributed to his lack of skill in accommodating to what members have come to learn to expect in such situations: Teacher D comments: He stands out in a classroom. No matter what you are doing or what class it is, he stands out like a sore thumb. I don't know exactly what he was making here. In this case, the child's action stood out in an otherwise uniform response to the task. Be-havior not in response to a teacher's request is taken as an indication that the proper busi-ness of the classroom is not being given priority. During the course of art production teachers move around the classroom ushering in-dividual children along. An alternative to this action is for the teacher to locate herself at her desk and have children come to her so that she can check on their progress. In doing this the teacher establishes a set of checks and controls to ensure that a child's behavior is synchronized with the whole class in moving the process toward a finished product. The fin-ished product itself can be used to detect and demonstrate the extent to which a child's be-havior has conformed to classroom routine. When teacher A had finished her instruction she said: 93 I don't think you should need much help from me but you are going to have to come and see me half way along. The momentum of the task is sustained by the device ["you are going to have to come and see me half way along"]. As well as establishing a checkpoint in the session, teachers have other ways to ensure task specific behavior. Praise is one way of encouraging a collective action. T E A C H E R A : I would just walk by and say, Now, that's nice Andy, I like yours Jamie, oh, you have an interesting one Lynn, and I go on like this. You sound like a hypocrite almost, but it's one way to be encouraging . . . In using praise and encouragement or scolding, contact with individual children is usually kept brief, enabling a teacher to distribute her attentional gaze across the entire class. The momentum of this scanning procedure continuously reinforces expectations of each child in the context of the group. T E A C H E R F : That's going to look good, Shannon. Have you done a collage, Dan? . . . [approximately 10-second intervals] That's fine R . J . , now that I've seen it. This kind of teacher action signals to all the children the stage of completion their art should be at at a particular time. In this sense, an efficient work routine is reinforced as the combined motivational effort of the group kept in check by both the teacher and the children. These cues stand to reinforce the programmatic movement of action to a close in the time frame allotted. Collective action wherein the finishing of the art product is made to happen in coordination with the end of the art session provides an even look to the session's close. Following clean-up children are expected to move into a non-art segment of the school day. The finished product itself stands as identifiable evidence that art has taken place and come' to an acceptable close. Having a finished art product to display, to discuss, or to take home are ways that teachers use to encourage participation in a predictable and approved manner. The programmatic look of the teaching and learning of art has been described as a sequence of distinct segments of action unfolding in predictable fashion over time. The pac-ing and phasing of these segments toward a desirable outcome is contingent on their 94 recognition and acceptance by children as well as teachers in the classroom. For example, early on in school, children learn to generate action and find its meaning in regard to the task to be carried out. Programmed action as procedures and routines are rehearsed as a way of introducing young children to "business as usual" at school. In this, objects take on context specific meaning. T E A C H E R A : I forgot to put out paper towels in those basins, so you will have your paper towels. Then when you've got your hands washed what do we do, Jamie? JAMIE: Dry them! T E A C H E R A : Very good! Then you go to your desk and you gently take your fingerpainting and set it under the ledge. In this instance, children are taught how to model their action in art to assimilate to an ag-gregate course of approved action. Action wherein children learn to respond in a predictable fashion to objects is meant to sustain an approved effect. The programmatic character of the classroom environment, its objects, and members become distinguishable as resources with which a child as well as a teacher must contend in sustaining a recognizable sense of the school day. Recognition of the typical and taken-for-granted order of these objects attests to the managerial skill of both the teacher and the child in sustaining art as an orderly part of the school day. This study focuses on the teacher's task in managing the programmatic look of that segment of the school day given to art. While discussion has centred around the role of children and teachers, mention needs to be made of a variety of people whose roles are consequential to events in the classroom. The roles of students, parents, and school personnel—teachers, custodians, and front office staff interacting either directly or indirectly in the phasing of the art teaching task are criti-cal to its outcome and its appearance of normalcy. Where people in the aforementioned roles create conditions and considerations which bring into question the task environment, a teacher can be seen actively managing events to sustain its sense of a school day as usual. I have attempted to describe a set of guidelines for programmed action which teachers consult in the teaching of the subject Art. Activities in the school day are taken to have a distinct beginning and end, and are sequenced at a pace and flow expected to be sustained 95 by members of the setting. Children learn to synchronize their action to bring it in line with the intended meaning of art as a programmed sequence of events. These features of the programmatic character of art serve as a set of advisings which guide teachers in selecting activities and guiding action recognizable as an approved part of the school day. In the following part of this chapter, an attempt is made to describe the art classificatory scheme which teachers consult as another dimension of their task environment. The relationship between the task environment as a programmed course of preferred action and an art classificatory scheme and the way in which these properties achieve specificity of meaning in the classroom will be demonstrated and discussed in Chapter VI . The Art Classificatory Scheme The art classificatory scheme informing a teacher's task environment embodies knowl-edge and skills intended to be used to decide matters pertaining to the teaching and learning of art. This knowledge attempts to answer for the teacher what is to be taught and when and how one should go about the task. In actuality, the art classificatory scheme and the scheme for programmed action are mutually constitutive. It is difficult to discuss one aspect of the teacher's task environment without referring to the other. Any art activity is classifiable by teachers as structured or experimental. As two kinds of art activities, they become classifiable by focusing on their properties that distinguish them as alternatives open to choice. The principal concern of teachers is whether art activ-ities in actual practice conform or do not conform to the programmed course of action de-fining the school day and its various segments. The description to follow elucidates a teacher-asserted concept of the classificatory scheme of structured and experimental art activities. Structured Art Activities In the early stages of my discussion with teachers in the study it appeared that struc-tured art activities were motivated exclusively by cultural events on the calendar: T E A C H E R F : Because it was Halloween I thought we should do something for Halloween. 96 Children's attempts to anticipate upcoming events seemed to confirm this view: C H I L D : I know what we are going to do. We are going to do something for Mother's Day because Mother's Day is on Sunday. There were further indications that the entire domain of structured art activities could be organized around events on the calendar such as Christmas, Father's Day, Mother's Day, Spring and Halloween. For example, after one year of teaching experience, Teacher G had developed an organized program for art the rationale of which appeared to arise out of an understanding of the relatedness of the above mentioned cultural events to the subject art: This may be silly, but at the end of the year, now, I have planned out what I am going to try to do next year, as far as each month goes. Like stick with your holiday ideas and weather. Things like that. So I'm going to try to put that into effect next year. This year, I just sort of went period by period and picked out whatever I wanted to do myself. That's what is going to go into ef-fect next year. While the order of these events on the calendar operated as a convenient device for determining the art program in any one year, it was not the sole motivating factor in decid-ing what gets done in art. It became clear that what gets done has as much to do with adaptation to the programmatic character of the school day as it does with culturally identi-fiable content and imagery. What distinguishes structured art activities is the way they sim-plify work demands both for the teacher and the student by coordinating action with the externally paced schedule of the school day and its physical resources in a predictable and approved way. They make clearly recognizable the task of the teacher and the student, es-tablishing a standard of expectation for action and the physical resources in the setting. With a perceivedly marked sequence of beginnings and endings detectable in the product it-self, teachers are able to ensure collective involvement in an aggregate of action. The pro-duct can be brought to completion in a designated space described by the desk top and with the use of a few basic materials. The level of complexity in assembling the art product is geared so that the teacher is ensured an aggregate response. In the following case Teacher G outlines the steps undertaken in doing an art Easter project: T E A C H E R G : We did an Easter egg. It ended up being an Easter project but it started out to be a Mother's Day [project] that I had hoped to get 97 done by Easter. It was a recipe book. Each of the kids were given an egg that they had to color. This is an example where they did it all on their own and I have a few pointers as far as outlining in black. I really stressed bright colors. What we did was, we mounted it on manilla tags, sent it away and it came back laminated . . . Then they each brought a recipe and had to do a recipe on this page here. The content and style of art; that is the action that it will take to complete the art project, is clearly perceivable in the outlined form, ["This is an example . . ."] . The choice of a popular cultural theme brings definition to the art activity. It is meant to be completed and shared with those at home. Such cultural themes are taken to have popular appeal both inside and outside the classroom. The making of the project can be seen proceeding in linear fashion with a distinct be-ginning and end and requiring only readily available materials and space. Directions for pro-duction are straightforward and can easily be disseminated to an aggregate of 20 or more children. Because of the uniformity of approach to production, a teacher can check the pace and flow of action in a brief scanning, thus ensuring that everyone is on task. Art activities such as the above Easter project with a predictable process and end product that ensure the child a successful experience thus become desirable. Clearly defined means of production such as copying, tracing, cutting and pasting, stencilling and coloring-in are processes teachers describe as bringing control to the art process and as a consequence the class. Experimental Art Activities In discussing experimental art activities, teachers in the study made reference to traditionally recognized art processes such as drawing, painting, collage, batik, papier mach6 and clay modeling. These art processes are described in the Art Curriculum Guide, the Prov-ince of Alberta, as approved art tasks to be undertaken with elementary school children. The rationale used by teachers in discussing the importance of these art activities as part of an art classificatory scheme informing teachers' choice-making is based on an understanding of what it means to experiment. The Art Curriculum Guide makes frequent reference to the notion of experimentation in art. The teacher of art is repeatedly advised to provide, "ample time for practice, experimentation and evolving of ideas" (p. 42). In the present study, 98 teachers were found to describe some art activities as experimental when, in following in-structions, children could be seen making choices and orchestrating their artistic behavior to some extent independently of the teacher. Teacher A instructed the children, "So after we are finished the story I want you to think and draw your part of the story." Teachers understand that a distinguishing feature of experimental art activities has to do with relinquishing teacher control over action associated with the process of making art. Determining factors related to art production are given to be under the control of the child. That is, outcomes and effects of art production are to some extent the child's responsibility and should be independent of the manipulative influence of the teacher. What becomes problematic about to some extent is what teachers are willing to accept as action compliant with the directive to experiment. Terms such as freedom and discover were used to characterize the idealized behavior of a child who fully experienced this kind of art activity. I inferred from teachers responses that a chance to experiment is assumed to deepen children's awareness of what it personally means to do art when it encourages them to be more of a task determiner. Hence, this kind of art activity is successful when the teacher is able to extricate herself from the child's ex-perience and at that critical moment when the child becomes involved in production. Teacher E described to me the kind of instruction given to children who are expected to ex-periment: What I like to try and do is give them one large kind of idea and then let them go ahead and experiment and try, and so that is why I say to them, this is only one way of doing it. There are many more and I know that you can think of some ways yourself . . . A teacher relinquishing control over production is not abandoning an expectation of order. Teacher A comments on the taken-for-granted expectation for disciplined action: Many a time that we paint I don't even move around, these being larger [paint jars]; I was watching everybody and getting paint, but often I just sit here and do something else while they are doing their painting. It isn't something that they need me for once they realize they have to be quiet, and they have to come up with their own choice and they [cannot] get carried away with what they are doing, usually, and they keep quite quiet. Rather, the programmatic character of art as disciplined action is the child's responsibility. 99 What characterizes the idealized experimental art activity is that the children not only work on their own but that they ["come up with their own choices"] while maintaining the con-ventional order of the classroom, ["they [cannot] get carried away"] and ["they keep quite quiet."] Ideally, teachers' understanding of experimentation supports a view given by the Art Curriculum Guide that the child as task-determiner take control over the art process and product. The Guide states, "Similarly in painting some children may require extra time to explore basic techniques while others may progress to more sophisticated experimentation and expression" (p. 50). It is taken for granted that divergence in individual action will not erode the programmatic character of art. Yet how this is to be accomplished is unclear. In attempting to do experimental art activities while sustaining an aggregate of programmed action, an ambiguous situation is created for the children. Teachers appeared annoyed when children did not seem to appreciate the opportunity to work productively at art activities in-dependently of teacher direction. This concern was expressed when children's action was pointed out as deliberately eroding the programmatic look of the school day. Specific instances of this will be discussed in Chapter VI . A selection of both structured and experimental art activities when taken together provide the range of possibilities of the art curriculum of the good teacher of art. When I asked Teacher D how the selection is made, she said: I don't know, whatever happens to pop into my mind then that's what we try. If there's a theme coming up like Easter or Halloween or Father's Day or Mother's Day, we try to spend one art period on those. The individual things between, say, December and Easter, there's nothing except Valentine's Day. You end up with about fifteen, sixteen art periods—then I don't like things that they can just cut, color and paste because to me there is nothing to that. I like them to explore whatever they would like to draw or paint whatever they want to do. This discussion with Teacher D appears to indicate that cultural events on the calendar operate as a useful device for organizing the school art program. As well, these same events provide a source of motivation for structured art activities. Teacher E responded in a similar fashion: 100 P A T : How do you go about picking art? T E A C H E R E : Okay, I guess partly I keep in mind the season. In Fall you often think of leaves and collecting leaves and doing a collage with leaves and tissue and such. Tissue paper leaves for the window because it is col-orful and brightens up the room and some of it is what ever is big and bright and is fun in doing and decorates the room. I like to have lots of their work around so it feels like their room. So, the seasons, occasions, and then in between time just projects that I think will be fun. While my initial discussion with teachers reveals that, in their view, an ideal school art program comprises a balance of structured and experimental art activities organized around cultural events on the calendar, teachers in actual practice appear to favor struc-tured art activities. The principal relevancy guiding this choice appears to be the facility with which structured art activities sustain the programmatic character of the school day and that segment of it given to art. Summary Attention was given in Chapter V to two knowledge bases which serve as guidelines informing strategies teachers use in making their work recognizable as approved instances of the teaching and learning of art. These guidelines comprise knowledge of the programmatic character of art and an art classificatory scheme consulted by teachers in order to produce the facticity of art as "business as usual." These inform the teacher's task and provide a general picture of the organizational structure within which art becomes recognizable. Following a brief statement summarizing teachers' knowledge of the programmatic character of art and the complementary use of the art classificatory scheme, two assertions of principal relevancy will be put forth that assert in brief what it is a teacher must be seen to have achieved whenever art is undertaken. Teachers' knowledge of the programmatic character of the teaching and learning of art can be asserted as a recognition of the requirement that the school day and the day's work come to an acceptable end at a given time and in substantial order. The outcome of art teaching and learning, as with any school subject, must be successfully ordered in re-spect to limits of time and organizational resources brought to bear on the school day. In 101 accomplishing this task in an approved way, teachers manage resources in the classroom so that an aggregate response to temporal and organizational contingencies is forthcoming in a predictable and approved way. Art activities are meant to take on a concerted beginning and end at a pacing and phasing that respects time and resources available. Segments of action such as large-group presentations, coordinated seat work assignments in art production, and art products finished on time and available to be displayed, discussed and/or taken home, when taken together, provide the possibility of art as "business as usual." The art classificatory scheme describes two categories of art activities, structured and experimental, that represent ideally approved approaches to the teaching of art. While a bal-ance of each when taken together is given by teachers as representing an ideal program in art, in actual practice teachers appear to approve structured art activities over experimental ones. In actual practice, structured art activities that more readily sustain the programmatic character of the school timetable and the organizational resources of the classroom are fa-vored. It is in actual practical circumstances of the classroom that we begin to understand the use of teachers' knowledge of this schema as an advisory set of guidelines. In summary, the principles governing the art teaching task are as follows: 1. When properly programmed, an art task guides the synchronization of an aggregate of recognizable and approved action, and 2. The use of the art classificatory scheme of structured and experimental art activities in practice is contingent on maintaining this programmatic course of action. Standing on their own, these statements do not provide much insight into the practical cir-cumstances within which they are made operational. Nor do we experience a sense of the dynamics of interaction that goes into making them functional. The demonstration of their use in practical circumstances begun in Chapter V will continue in Chapter VI. Specific instances will be examined wherein teachers attempt to sustain a recognizable sense of the programmatic character of art teaching and learning. 102 CHAPTER VI FINDINGS: TEACHING GUIDELINES A N D T H E STRATEGIES T H A T M A K E T H E M R E C O G N I Z A B L E Introduction The principal relevancies governing the way teachers think about art teaching have been summed up in Chapter V as follows: 1. when properly programmed, an art task guides the synchronization of an aggregate of recognizable and approved action, and 2. the use of the art classificatory scheme of structured and experimental art activities in practice is contingent on maintaining this programmatic course of action. When I suggest that the above relevancies are desirable and approved outcomes striven for by the teachers in this study, I mean that their use is an attempt by teachers to make art recognizable as an integral part of the school day. In this chapter I will attempt to dem-onstrate how a teacher achieves this outcome. This will be accomplished by demonstrating how desirable outcomes are sustained and undesirable outcomes minimized. In this chapter I will seek to demonstrate that a teacher comes to appreciate that there are features relevant to the above guidelines and strategies for making them recognizable as an integral part of the school day. These strategies will amount to scanning for the motives of the interacting members— children, other teachers, parents, and school personnel to classify them as desirable (or un-desirable) in respect to a standard of programmed action. The term motivational effort will be used in this chapter to direct attention to an underlying intention behind an action as it is uncovered and disclosed by a teacher. It is this interpretive work which teachers do that brings a sense of recognition and approval to art, giving it a recognized programmatic status. We can say that for the good teacher of art effective programming entails the 103 management of a number of contingencies in the setting thereby making events occurring in practical circumstances seem reasonable to participants. Four features that teachers refer to in creating the sense of a properly programmed course of action in art will be presented in the present chapter as themes: (1) The Pacing and Phasing of Action in Art, (2) The Physical Condition of the Setting, (3) Thematic Content and Stylistic Form of Art, and (4) Assessment of Effort in Art. The contrast between structured and experimental art activities is more clearly seen when viewed with respect to teachers' efforts to manage the above features and thus sustain the programmatic character of art in the school day. Structured and experimental art activ-ities as alternative ways of doing art and the consequences of choosing one line of action over the other will be examined in respect to the above features. The manner in which motives are uncovered is not given in the cases described below as a way of characterizing any one teacher's personality, but as a way of demonstrating how an intended program of action is sustained. Where an episode seems to disclose suspiciousness on the part of a teacher regarding an everyday event, the event is meant to demonstrate how teachers manage the programmatic character of a course of events. The Pacing and Phasing of Action in Art Responsibilities for the continuous pacing and phasing of events in the art classroom with the school timetable and other orderly organizational ways of the school fall to the classroom teacher. Teachers in the study expect children to recognize these demands and share some responsibility in managing their behavior in relationship to them. On one occa-sion, Teacher A made the following statement to her Grade one class before they began to paint: We will try to be finished our pictures by quarter after two. When the big hand is on three and the small hand is on two. I don't know if that is going to give you enough time . . . Here Teacher A expects that conditions in the setting can somehow be managed so that pro-duction of art unfolds in a typical way with due consideration of the constraints imposed by 104 the school timetable. With the ever-present likelihood of external constraints of timing, the success of the teaching and learning of art becomes contingent on the competent manage-ment of an aggregate flow of action in relationship to such constraints. The sense of having to use strategy to manage affairs is apparent in the remark of Teacher C : T E A C H E R C : I want to get that happy medium in there. I want people to be able to solve a problem with building an owl in their own way, within a certain length of time. Now the timing was not too bad today. Action in art must be managed with respect for the school timetable. Good management begins with the teacher's attempt to make art recognizable as segments of action unfolding in predictable sequence. Teacher E remarks: I suppose that is the way we operate, which has its advantages and disadvan-tages. You do want them to have a finished product, because part of art, I feel is, you start something, you work at it, you see it through to the finish; it is important to finish what you start. In this statement Teacher E sums up the typical manner in which segments of action are paced and phased to bring control over the act of making art. In an aggregate of action children are expected to ["start something"], ["work at it"], ["finish"] what they ["start"] and show evidence of ["a finished product"]. These segments of action represent what chil-dren need to know in order to act in a manner that sustains the programmatic character of art. As well, they imply what a teacher must be seen doing to bring this action about. A major task of the teacher is to signal to all the children when one segment of action is about to end and another is to begin. This emphasizes a sense of accomplishment of Art as a school subject by avoiding any notion that a finished art product and the methods that go into its production cannot be undertaken in a specified time. Finished art products and the aggregate of synchronized action that goes into making them possible is testimony to the demands imposed on the teacher's managerial skill in teaching art. Children are described as "trying" in art and "making an effort" when they synchronize their behavior to bring it into compliance with such programs. Teacher D re-marks : Well, they always try it for the first five, ten minutes. If they don't enjoy it they don't stick at it very long. There's no way they'll stay at it the full 40 minutes. If they don't like it they'll try it for five, ten minutes maximum and 105 then they'll be looking for something else or they'll get distracted. At this age they'll try it at least once. This one seemed to keep them for most of 40 min-utes, so it was actually a good project. On another occasion, Teacher D made a further remark suggesting that desirable be-havior in art. is directly related to sustaining an aggregate of action over a specified period of time. T E A C H E R D : No, they were all trying on this one so it was one of the better art projects. None of them were saying, "I don't want to do this," or "Can I do something else?" Most of them seemed to take the whole period. In sustaining an aggregate of action teachers presuppose that each child can be brought to follow an approved course of action. On such occasions cooperative behavior is reinforced by pointing out that the child's effort demonstrates an approved way of doing art. This kind of strategy reinforces programmatic action. T E A C H E R G : Scott, that little guy back there, I was complimenting him and telling him how I thought he was finishing something and saying to him, "Don't you feel better when you finish it?" A lot of the time, he gets stuck and he literally rips things up. When Scott synchronizes his action in art with the pace and flow of action of the rest of the class, he is rewarded for his effort. When the effort of children does not appear to comply with requirements for pacing and phasing of action in concert they are treated as special cases whose habits, attitudes, or life style stand in the way of their achieving responsible action. I will refer to a number of cases wherein the pace and flow of events is interrupted by children. The kind of reasoning done by the teacher who sees such action as being unusual is done as a way of sustaining the reasonableness of art against incident. T E A C H E R A : Then you get a child who will do what they can that day, is rather slow at working and they put it up and they don't even pick it up. I have to pick it up and say, "You know you never finished this. Could I have this finished?" There's that type and then the other one would be your child that works like Ben does, finishes it. It may not show the greatest artistic picture, but it is completed through it all. In this instance children who are unable or unwilling to concert their action are character-ized as deficient ["is rather slow"]. Teacher A makes an adjustive effort when confronted by this variation in action by pointing out the type of child who is able to finish on time. As 106 well, she points out to the child his or her deficiency in not complying with the program of action ["you never finished this"]. The implication is that the act of making art and the ef-fort required to sustain it can be coordinated within the time specified for it. Early in the term, Teacher G found that Sarah's work habits in the art class did not conform to the standard pacing of art production sustained by the rest of the class of chil-dren: At the beginning of the year, she would do something that I would think would ( be equivalent to a Grade three. Like it would be a drawing and it would be very sloppy, never finished. She was one of the people that would be done in about ten minutes when they had a double period. Then when we'd hand stuff back she'd be the first one to throw it out. I told her mum at the interview about her whole attitude towards art and how she feels about her stuff. Her mum and I worked together a little bit and just helped her realize that it was something you should take pride in. Now, she takes her time a lot better. Her things are still really immature compared to the other kids. Teacher G is able to formulate Sarah's problem as her ["attitude"] which has as its consequence Sarah's unwillingness to conform to the established social pace. Sarah is de-scribed in this case as a student expected to share the same priorities as the teacher who reasons that all the children should concert their action in conformity with the pace ex-pected. By labeling Sarah's behavior as having to do with her ["attitude"] and lack of ["pride"], Teacher E begins to bring the situation under control—viewing Sarah as the spe-cial case of a student whose disposition stands in the way of her making an effort to com-ply with the expected course of events. On another occasion, Teacher G pointed out to me a child whose behavior had to be brought into check when she seemed to ignore the priorities set out by Teacher G : T E A C H E R G : No, she did finish early like usual. What she often loves to do is to be a little housekeeper in here. P A T : Oh, really? T E A C H E R G : She loves to clean and that's fine. I like it just so she can be the one to clean the room. I have gotten strict with her that way, and told her I'd rather she took her time. Then, there's still lots of things that can be cleaned and fixed in here, but her work should come first. Here Teacher G is able to appreciate the child's effort to maintain the physical condition of 107 the classroom. However, Teacher G determines that there is in the child's disposition a characteristic that is disruptive of the purpose at hand: Children are not encouraged to fin-ish an activity early so that they can spend the remaining time freely doing whatever they wish to do. It is understood that children are not free to extricate themselves from the pace and flow of events at will . The cases cited speak of the kind of strategies a teacher uses in sustaining the programmatic effect of art against incidents that threaten to lead to its disintegration. The following are offered as situations where the programmatic character of the school day warrants the use of structured art activities. A structured art activity seems based on a belief in the child's inability to pace and phase his or her action in art in a specified period of time. A structured art activity includes a set of instructions which compel the coordination of action in art. An exemplary art product and/or a precise set of instructions for its production serve as a kind of script engaging an entire class in a predictable course of action. In the case to follow Teacher A provides an exemplary product (Appendix G ) and a clearly articulated set of instructions for the class to follow: T E A C H E R A : Here is the Mother's Day card you will be doing. Today is going to be a lot of coloring but the putting together and the colors you choose will be your choice. Now remember that this is for a very favorite lady and ladies have certain colors that they like better than others, so you should think of a color that your mother likes. Then you work everything into that color. If you picked a background paper of yellow then you should make—what was the name of these flowers? Right, they are called carnations. We are going to do the carnations for Mother, and I said the carnations could be varied in color. I don't know if they come in all col-ors, but they come in many colors, so you work at the coloring of your vase, coloring your carnations to suit the back paper you picked so that Mother will like it all. So it will go together, the colors blend and it makes a beautiful card. Now I am going to put the steps on the board for making the card. Here are the steps that you will go through, and I expect you to carry right through them on your own. I don't think you should need much help from me, but you are going to have to come and see me halfway along. Number one, I want you to color the vase. A vase is what? What's that Michael? M I C H A E L : It's what you put the flowers in. T E A C H E R A : Right, a holder for flowers is called a vase. Number one says color vase and leaves, I guess I better put on here "and leaves." Now next is on a separate paper I'll be giving you the carnations. So next is 108 color the carnations. Number three, you are then to choose the colored paper. Now here is where I come into it. I will not let you choose the paper unless these are colored beautifully. So you have to come to me and show me this, and if I say, yes, go ahead and pick your paper, you go to the table and pick the color you want. Only from those. I won't take out any more. I have tried to pick a good variety. Then you will come back to your seat; if it is a "no" here, you have to go back to your desk and color some more; if it is a "yes" here, you will pick your paper. Now, would you look while I show you how to fold four-fold paper. I am going to show you all, right now, how to fold. Then I'm not going to stop at my desk to show you again. It's going to be up to you. Al l you do is spread it on your desk and fold like a book. The routinization of the art process is made evident in the teacher's large group pre-sentation and reinforced further in the teacher's copies of fixed outlines of a basket of flowers given to each child. Furthermore, as a programmed sequence of action the above script offers Teacher A an opportunity to scan the class to ensure concerted action, thereby keeping in check behavior that tends to stand out. A precise set of instructions and an ex-emplary art product clearly specifies what action will be approved as making an effort in art. In a discussion with Teacher A following the above art activity for Mother's Day she stressed the practical importance of sequences of action that sustain the expectation that work will be paced and phased over the time given to it. T E A C H E R A : Yes you see if I just said, "Alright, now we will color the vase and the leaves"; some children are going to make a good job of that in a short time. Others will be another half hour before they finish. Well then what does the first one do. Local knowledge appears to support the view that some methods of art production such as copying, coloring-in, tracing, cutting and pasting, and stenciling are warranted by the need to ensure that children start and finish something, have something to work on, and produce an acceptable finished product. In simplifying and depersonalizing the art pro-cess, thereby placing limitations on possible variations in artistic response, teachers ensure the coordination of action and the programmatic look of art. For example, Teacher E finds that the effort of some children is inhibited when they are left on their own. Teacher E remarks about these children. I would say that Alice has been reluctant, Mark is reluctant to draw, Lorie at times will be. Tammy, Bryant, Scott, Mandy—they have all at some time or other shown a reluctance to actually draw something. I think even when Cathy was doing the tooth unit with them, even though it was their imagination, their 109 ideas, again I guess they are just really afraid of making a mistake, which is something I think we have to work on at all levels—that yqu learn by making mistakes. You don't start out knowing, and they don't realize this. The poor little kids come to school thinking that if I don't I don't get it right, it's wrong and I'm not a good person, and they take it very personally. That is when, at times, I will use tracers, even though I know they are terribly frowned upon. I think I mentioned that when we do large leaves in the fall and then sponge paint on them, I'll say to them, "here are leaves you can trace if you wish; if you wish to do your own, please do," and I have been pleased with them. Some of them will start out with the tracer and then they'll get the hang of it and they'll make all kinds of their own, but they just kind of needed that to get the feel of it. It is kind of like a crutch, I guess, and the sad part I suppose is some of them they never leave the crutch and try something on their own. When there are a few children who are unwilling to enter into art production Teacher A uses ["tracers"] as a device to help them make an adjustive effort to art. On another occasion, Teacher E explains that devices such as coloring-in fixed outlines of stylized forms brings a sense of stability and relaxation to the school day. T E A C H E R E : It is not creative, it certainly couldn't be classed as art, but they find it relaxing to sit and color and it is not something that we would do a lot of but occasionally we make something like that available to them. That ["they find it relaxing to sit and color"] ensures a look of productiveness across the entire class. When clearly defined instruction for art production sustains children's effort in art it also prevents a deterioration of the routine course of action of the school day. What is evi-dent in the next case is the extent to which some processes associated with structured art activities reinforce the look of "business as usual" in the art classroom. T E A C H E R D : You hit classes of Mikes where they want something concrete: "Sit and color, put it together [for me]." This year, I have got a few of those too. Like the one on giraffes and geometric shapes. Things where I do most of the work and the kids just sit and paste them together. Teacher D attributes to some children the kind of behavior that induces a teacher to do most of the work for them in order to maintain a routine course of events ["sit and color, put it together for me"] (Appendix H ) . Classes where a number of children are apt to stand out and when the noise tends to be high are held in check by structured art activities. A task given in art can be used as a device for assisting children who stand out in an aggregate of action. The similarity in response expected of children enables a teacher to act in a confident manner when one child stands out. In the case given below, Ralph, a Grade 110 one student, has made a number of trips to the desk of Teacher A to inquire about the state of completion of his work. T E A C H E R A : Well, I was looking for a finished job so it would look nice and now maybe nice to an adult's eyes. I guess because you see Ralph made three or four trips. He had a delicate, lovely-looking plant, but I wanted to see a neat job. So that is what I was looking for, that they had completed the project and really put some thought into making it look like a carnation with their little touches of outlining and all. Another example demonstrates how an expectation for uniformity in response enables Teacher A to see at a glance action that tends to stand out: T E A C H E R A : Did you get all those points of those carnations this time. That's pretty good, missed a little wee bit there. You certainly got the points on these carnations. But you missed the points of these. Do you think you could get out to the points of them? The obvious character of the product operates as a device assisting Teacher A to make recognizable to Ralph how he can bring his action in line with the normal course of events. While freedom to make choices in respect to the art product and its method of pro-duction is decided in advance by the teacher for structured art activities, it is intended to be given over to the child for experimental art activities. T E A C H E R E : We try to get away from the business of the teacher brings in a sample and everybody looks at it and everybody's looks the same and you kind of have to work around that and by bringing in many different samples you show them that there is not just one right way of doing it. When Teacher E says that ["there is not just one right way of doing it"] she is suggesting that for this kind of activity variation in individual response is meant to be encouraged somehow. Further to this Teacher E says: I guess that they feel free enough that they don't have to make what I have made. I think that it is a bad thing when they feel so constricted or self-conscious or afraid to try their own ideas because hopefully what we are trying to develop here is the individual and I don't want them to feel that they have to do exactly what I have done to have a good product. Implied in the above remarks is the notion that an environment free of teacher input invites children to enter spontaneously into art in a manner that is believed to be natural to child-hood. It is critical that only enough direction be forthcoming in a large group presentation to permit children to get started. After getting started, action is expected to move at a pace Ill and flow that sustains the routinization of art as usual in the school day. That children are to some extent expected to coordinate their action independently of the teacher is the crux of the problem. It is not clear what teachers are willing to accept as action compliant with the directive to experiment. Yet the actions of the children are expected to be guided by the same priorities as those of the teacher. Teachers express disappointment that oftentimes in actual practice children do not appreciate the spirit in which an invitation to do experimen-tal art activities is given. That is, children are seen using the notion of freedom as a means to obtain results in a manner and toward an end regarded by teachers as contrary to what they hold to be true about children and their artistic expression. When children are per-mitted to make choices on their own, the decisions they make are often perceived as calling into question the teacher's skill in managing that segment of time in the school day given to art. Behavior such as child-initiated copying, tracing, asking teachers and peers for help, and deciding not to do anything are regarded by teachers as problematic. Choices made often stand in contrast to what teachers expect. Children seem confused by the ambiguity in the directive to experiment. A number of instances will be cited below where teachers regard children's effort in experimental art activities as unacceptable. That is, no matter whether the intent was to seek assistance in resolving what to do or to test controls, the resulting action seemed suggestive of permissive behavior when received in the context of the school day. On one occasion, Teacher A had read a story about whales to her Grade one class. Following the story she asked them to paint their impression of the whales. T E A C H E R A : See, Jerome had done the first one with the tail and the chil-dren picked it up and did theirs that way. That's something that you do have to watch. In this instance, turning to other children for assistance is a deviation from the kind of action expected and is regarded as ["something you do have to watch"]. The solution to the task is regarded as unacceptable. In the next art activity, Teacher D describes how she did a crayon resist/tempera wash art activity with her Grade three class. The children were instructed to draw fish on 112 paper using crayons (Appendix I). The theme marine life was announced to the class as the preferred subject matter. After the children had completed their drawing Teacher D said, "We are going to paint over the whole thing with blue to make it look like water." Following this brief set of instructions and as the children began to paint, Teacher D brought out shell macaroni and offered it to the children suggesting that they might want to glue it on the paper. The choice was up to them; "I also brought some shell macaroni if you want to glue it on and paint it different colors to make it kind of 3D. You do not have to use macaroni unless you wish." Teacher D and I discussed the art activity after school. She comments: T E A C H E R D : Now, I forgot . . . oh, the macaroni, I thought they could get more a ground-level thing on it [ocean floor]. They didn't seem to have any idea where snails and shell creatures lived. They've got them in the top corners [of the paper] and all over. PAT: Umm, humm, let's look at that. T E A C H E R D : This one is kind of inventive, putting eyes and a mouth with the shells. P A T : I noticed that a few of the kids thought it was a good idea after some-one did it. T E A C H E R D : The general impression was "Well, I've got some macaroni so 111 just put them at each corner." A lot of them, when they had just laid them out, had them just in each corner. PAT: So they didn't see? T E A C H E R D : They didn't make the relationship at all of how to use the shells, to draw feelers or anything on them. I was hoping maybe they'd come up with that on their own without my telling them. Or, put them on the bottom with a few rocks or plants, with the shells around. Their plants didn't turn out too bad. PAT: They turned out quite nice, I think. I hadn't thought about that. It's really interesting about the shells. Here is a child who used the shells. I think this was the first person. T E A C H E R D : No, this was the first person, Jackie. She started with them. PAT: All right. T E A C H E R D : Then the other person saw them, her eyes, and thought that it was good. He has got a better idea, though. He's made snails with those, which is what I was hoping someone would come up with. This one is going to turn out nice, too, once he gets his colors in. 113 For the theme, marine life, Teacher D introduced shell macaroni and assumed that the chil-dren would discover its inherent possibility as an art material. They had to infer the expec-tations of Teacher D from a set of conflicting directives: ["I also brought some shell macaroni if you want to glue it on and paint it different colors to make it kind of 3D"], and then ["You do not have to use macaroni unless you wish"]. Teacher A assumes that the children share and hold as relevant the same stock of knowledge she does on what to do with the shells. She assumes that the children know and hold as relevant the inherent possi-bility of the shell macaroni as a material for depicting marine life. In observing that a num-ber of children placed the shell macaroni on the four corners of the paper, Teacher D determines this to be a questionable choice, yet not unusual when children are left to work on their own. ["They didn't seem to have any idea where snails and shell creatures live"]. This unanticipated solution was copied by a number of children in the class, bringing into question the nature of the task assignment ["I was hoping maybe they'd come up with that on their own without my telling them"]. She reasons about the children's lack of resolution in discovering the right solution, ["The general impression was, 'Well, I've got some maca-roni so I'll just put them at each corner'"]. The children are found to be negligent in two ways: they did not resolve the proper use of the macaroni, and they copied their peers' solution. However, that some children complied with what was expected, ["He's made snails with those which is what I was hoping someone would come up with"] and that the remain-ing children could be found to be special cases who were not able to ["make the relation-ship"] demonstrates how Teacher D is able to resolve the situation and justify the outcome. On another occasion, Teacher A demonstrated to her Grade one class a simple one-over, one-under weaving process using construction paper. She pointed out repeated patterns of color in the weaving she had done but did not attempt to show the children how to achieve the effect. T E A C H E R A : The majority of art work I want them to know what type of thing I want—how I do it—but I want them to do it. Even today, you see I didn't show them, maybe I did show them as many as four rows, but I wanted them to feel free to make the two-color, four-color, eight-color, I didn't care. You see this is interesting, how he is bringing in the white every third row. You see, at first he didn't start out so well in a pattern, 114 but now he has gotten into a pattern. So, no, I don't, and it is hard at times to motivate and not have them copy. In the above episode Teacher A responds to my query about directing the children in what she wants as a finished product when she says, ["So, no, I don't"]. She expects chil-dren to make choices of patterns of color in their weavings through a process of experimen-tation: ["I wanted them to feel free to make the two-color, four-color, eight-color"]. When Teacher A says, ["I didn't care"], she is suggesting the likelihood of a variation in response as children try to resolve the task. While the children did not copy the exemplar they did turn to the teacher and others for help in determining what was required of them. Teacher A regards this seeming lack of coordination in the pacing and phasing of art as characteristic of the approach. Inviting children to make choices on their own becomes a problem for teachers when children are unable to anticipate what is implied by the invita-tion to experiment. In the case above, Teacher A sustains the reasonableness of her ap-proach by noting one child's ability to comply with what was expected ["You see, at first he didn't start out so well in a pattern, but now he has gotten into a pattern"]. Inferred here is the teachers' notion of the reasonableness of expecting children to find an acceptable solution to the task assignment. In a further discussion with Teacher A , she claimed that children copy "when they are in doubt." This "doubt," as it is described by Teacher A , does not bring to question the teacher's instruction, but points out the disposition of some children who are unable to enter into the spirit of working independently of the teacher and others in making choices. Teacher D found the disposition of one child to be such, ["She does very little on her own"] that while she did not copy other children's art, she did ask others to do her work for her. Teacher D says: She's kind of a conniver. She does very little on her own. She's always manipu-lating people. I can't do this. Can you do this for me? Can you help me with this? In this case, the child's solution to the task is regarded as disruptive: ["manipulating people"]. 115 In the next case Teacher C has asked her Grade three class to paint a picture of a fish. P A T : How did you introduce this idea? T E A C H E R C : I know for one thing I didn't do one ahead of time. I actually told them what it was we were going to do, that it was going to be fish and they were going to look as if they were swimming under the ocean, and how we were going to go about it, and so some who are not secure like Jeff, for instance, will want a fish to trace, but I deliberately did not model that one because a fish you can fairly well choose your own kind of fish and do it, and color doesn't matter because there are all kinds of fish in the world. Whereas Jeff might have expected a model to be held up in a structured art activity, in the case of experimental art activities Teacher C feels that none needs to be offered. That Jeff would take time to inquire is attributed to his inability to cope with the reasonableness of the request. The remark ["not secure"] treats as atypical a child who does not enter spon-taneously into action. Teachers in a number of instances given below suggest how experi-mental art activities encourage this look of disintegration in the pacing and phasing of action in art. T E A C H E R E : Again they would flock to those that they thought were good drawers, good artists. They would look at somebody else's tree and say, "Oh mine isn't that good. I can't possibly do this, therefore, I"m not even going to try.' and it was really difficult to say, "Don't worry about it." In this case, Teacher E expresses disillusionment with the art activity when several children seek help from other children. She attempts to make some adjustive effort by viewing the children's lack of effort as attributable to their attitude. When her Grade three class conforms to her expectations, Teacher D describes them as having "fairly good common sense." She relates, however, that it is not uncommon to have whole classes that are socially disruptive, and in order to maintain the socially con-certed production of art towards a finished product, she has found it better to avoid doing experimental art activities with the children. Avoiding one whole domain of art activities is one way Teacher D has learned to get around conduct that tends to be disruptive: T E A C H E R D : Some classes can't take any change at all. For instance, a class two years ago I had, painting just drove them crazy. Every time we took out the paints, they had a do with paint. So then you'd put the paints 116 away for a month or two and then you bring them out again, same thing happens so you put them away for another month or two. With classes like that you tend to do more drawing and coloring than be real creative. PAT: Why should that be? Teacher D : I don't know. Just because I can't stand the mess and I can't stand the noise. The kids end up fighting and screaming and crying. It's extra pressure. It's not worth the effort to go to the effort to fix the paint just for them to have a paint fight. Teacher D's remarks ["Just because I can't stand the mess and I can't stand the noise"] and ["It's not worth the effort"] are suggestive of a sense of disillusionment in contending with an art activity that does not ensure cooperative action. Teacher F asserts the same sense of disappointment with the manner in which chil-dren responded to her invitation to experiment. T E A C H E R F : It's awful when it gets to be a battle with discipline and they have to sit and do it because you say so. I know there are some things they won't enjoy as much as others, but I think, basically, it should be something more relaxed and free where they can do things on their own. Teachers appear betrayed by children's failure to appreciate the opportunity to enter spontaneously into art independently of teacher intervention in the process. Choices made by children such as copying, tracing, engaging others to do their work, refusing to work, and working in other unorthodox ways create a disenchantment with experimental art activities in actual practice. No matter if the child were seeking assistance or testing controls, teachers tended to see such action as indicating a kind of permissiveness likely to occur when experi-mental art activities are undertaken. Yet this look of nonuniformity in the setting seems all but guaranteed whenever a teacher invites children to enter spontaneously into art without a clearly delineated set of instructions. Structured art activities that offer a precise set of instructions which serve as a kind of script engaging children in an aggregate of action appear to assist both the teacher and the child in sustaining the pace and flow of a normal course of action. Further to this, the requirement to sustain trie pace and flow of an aggregate of action perpetuates and rein-forces the orientation to structured art activities. 117 The Physical Condition of the Setting In the preceding section I indicated that art is made recognizable as an integral part of the school day as teachers manage the pacing and phasing of an aggregate of approved action in a given period of time. Structured art activities which sustain the temporal flow of action appear to be preferred by teachers in the study, and not experimental art activities. In this section I will take up and discuss the normal physical conditions of the setting and how their management sustains the programmatic character of art in the school day. This is meant to suggest that the requirement that standard physical conditions in the setting be maintained warrants the use of structured art activities over experimental ones. Children are expected to learn at an early age that their effort in art is determinable to some extent by the degree of cooperative action they display in maintaining normal phys-ical conditions in the classroom. Furthermore, teaching competence can be determined as the extent to which children are motivated to take responsibility for this kind of action. Teacher A elaborates on the belief that children should learn to adjust their action in ac-cordance with the intended use of objects in the setting. T E A C H E R A : I think that part of painting is keeping a reasonably tidy mess around them, being careful, thinking of others. Of course it is all training in citizenship I suppose. I think that the experience that they get doing this type of thing, thinking of others, watching that they don't bump someone else is important. Implied here is the intended use of objects that sustains the programmatic character of art as an orderly part of the school day. To justify the need to maintain this orderliness, Teacher A locates the action associated with the objects ["being careful, thinking of others, watching"] as part of a larger scheme ["citizenship"]. I take it Teacher A believes that children's effort in art should be guided by the requirement to preserve the standard ap-pearance of the setting. Teacher competence is regarded as being brought into question in the setting whenever it appears that conditions in the classroom project a sense of disregard for a standard ap-pearance. Teacher F says, "I thought I didn't know if I could handle the organization of all that, the mess in the classroom when it is not even my classroom." Teachers become aware 118 that in working in close proximity with other members of the school, who support a notion of standard appearance, places demands on them. It is the presence of these demands that determines what counts as normal physical conditions in the classroom. Teacher E talks about the school in which she had previously worked and the requirements projected by people in various roles in the setting: Some of them are very fussy; art can only happen in the art room, you don't dare spill anything or mess up the floor or use the windows and so on, but I have been fortunate in that I can use my room which means I can have art whenever I want, although we do try to keep the mess cleaned up. Teacher E's remark indicates that teachers are aware of how other members in the setting insist upon a standard classroom appearance. For example, the school custodian is respon-sible for the routine upkeep of the school and each classroom as one physical configuration in a larger organizational scheme. The role of the custodian offers a reason for bringing be-havior disruptive of the institutional look of the overall scheme under review. I asked Teacher E if the custodian complained about physical conditions in the classroom: T E A C H E R E : They would probably complain to the administrator who would then approach us. On the same issue, Teacher A says that some features of the setting demand more at-tention than others in managing an appearance of art as usual: I try to be careful of the floors so the caretakers don't jump on me and there-fore I can do it [teach art]. In maintaining the standard appearance of the floors while doing art Teacher A is reinforc-ing the programmatic character of the school day. This is meant to suggest that any action undertaken must take into account what objects in the setting are brought into use and how they are used. What has been indicated to this point is that teacher competence in art is contingent on what members of the school are willing to accept as normal physical conditions of the classroom across the school day. Acquired knowledge of these demands determines to some extent what art activities are chosen and how they are done. The use of structured art activities protects the standard look of the classroom. An exemplary art product and/or a precise set of instructions for production serves as a script, 119 thereby delimiting action and the use of objects. Art materials and tools are chosen that function in a bounded space described by the physical configuration of the desk. The desk is a pivotal point of action. Along with the art materials and tools, it implies an intended course of action. This physical configuration as a depersonalized, isolated space prescribes the same line of action to all the children in the class, ensuring an overall aggregate of ap-proved action. For example, Teacher A feels that it is important that the children learn at an early age to follow step by step a course of action predetermined by the teacher. In the following episode, she has the children read aloud the steps for assembling an art project (Appendix G ) : T E A C H E R A : A l l right, before we begin I still want to go one more. Girls read number one. GIRLS: Color vase and leaves. T E A C H E R A : Boys: BOYS: Color carnations. T E A C H E R A : Girls: GIRLS: Show teacher. T E A C H E R A : Boys: BOYS: Choose paper. T E A C H E R A : Girls: GIRLS: Fold paper. T E A C H E R A : Boys: BOYS: Cut out vase. T E A C H E R A : Girls: GIRLS: Cut out slits. T E A C H E R A : Boys: BOYS: Cut out flowers. T E A C H E R A : Girls. GIRLS: Paste flowers on the stem. In the above episode, it is suggested that the outlined form and the accompanying 120 procedures determine what action and objects to such action is approved in art. It seems that over time teachers come to prefer art activities that reinforce action in a space bounded by the child's desk. Maintenance of this effect permits teachers to more clearly delineate what will be approved as compliant and noncompliant behavior. As well, the uniform look of this overall configuration makes the scanning procedures of the teacher more effective. A N D Y : Ya, why me? T E A C H E R D : Because you are out of your seat and not working. Teachers in the study suggest that normal physical conditions are more difficult for teachers to maintain in experimental art activities. Traditional art processes such as clay modeling, papier mache and painting, where children take more control over the product and process of production, are regarded by teachers as more likely to bring into question teacher competence in managing the class. Whereas structured art activities sustain a standard of physical order locally approved and recognizable in the school day, experimental art activities are given as more likely to erode the routine order of the classroom. Thus the introduction of an experimental art activity is regarded as multiplying the demand characteristics of the setting. Teacher E talks about papier mSche as an experimental art activity and how she attempts to overcome the problem of order by protecting the contents of the room against misuse. When we did papier mach6 puppets we had a tremendous mess, so we covered the floor, we moved the desks to the side, and we worked in the middle of the room . . . covered the floor with newspaper and everybody just worked on there, and we bunched up all the newspapers and threw them out when we were done. In this instance Teacher E attempts to detect all the problems that arise when children do papier mach6. Teachers come to expect that children's action in doing experimental art activities encourages messiness. Teacher E says: We try not to get the floor too dirty. Someone spilled their ink the other day and I kind of expected that would happen somewhere along the line, so I try to take it into consideration in that I don't want to make the job for the care-takers any worse. If we do make a mess we clean it up. When children initiate action on their own, it becomes more difficult to monitor their action. 121 In the case given below Teacher A , like Teacher E , regards children's action in doing experimental art activities to be inclined toward a disruption of normal physical conditions. T E A C H E R A : Now that means that it is going to take a lot of room and that is why you have to spread your desks out. You will have to watch that you don't hit the edges and knock the paint flying and that is why I have you spread out this way. Implied in Teacher A's remarks is the likelihood that demands on the setting will likely mul-tiply and that the teacher's task is to protect the environment against disruption. Teachers did not appear to consider that there might be a deficiency in the reasonableness of the in-struction given to the children. In another instance Teacher A is shown seeing the problem as being with the children and not with the way the activity is organized. Children in her Grade one class were vying for the use of a limited number of paint brushes in order to finish their painting. Teacher A and I had placed three jars each of red, yellow, and blue paint on a table which was centrally located for the children's use. Each jar of paint held two or three large brushes to be used for that color only. Children were requested to come to the table and take one brush (one color) at a time to their desk to paint. Before the children started for their desk, the brush was to be wiped against the rim of the jar to re-move excess paint. The children arrived at the table at random intervals often taking what-ever brush was available or waiting in anticipation of one coming available. T E A C H E R A : Girls and boys listen. I was not happy the last day you painted, so you better listen to how we do it once more. By now you should know what to expect and I find some of you do it your own way, not what Teacher A says. Some of you are using your hands to stop the drip. If I see any hand going today you're going to give up on your painting. You wipe it [the brush] on the rim and you carry it to your seat and it won't drip anything. But some of you are not listening, and that's why you are getting a mess on the side, and you are going to get a drip in your hand, then it's dripping through your fingers onto the floor and we are not the clean painters we used to be. So today, I want you to make sure your hand isn't under there catching drips. But if I see a drip on the floor there's trouble. In the above instance Teacher A finds the effort of the children to be deficient in following procedures that would maintain normal physical conditions. That the children's movements were an attempt to procure brushes and colors as they come available in order to finish their art was not a consideration. That children had to negotiate the choice and use 122 of color under the constraints of time and space was not recognized as a factor contributing to the breakdown of present physical conditions. In another instance, Teacher A demonstrates how she negotiates routine compliance with the demand that physical conditions be sustained by warranting through instruction what options children have in their use of clay to remain within a range of acceptable be-havior. T E A C H E R A : What I do with it is usually one day we will make a ball. "Alright, pinch out some ears. If you want big ears do this. If you want small ears do this. Pinch out a tail," and I go on showing them. "Oh, what have we got now? Let's see it on your hand. Oh, that is interesting. What are you going to call yours?" And then we will just roll it into a ball again and we will start something else. "Let's think of a bird. Oh, it's kind of bony," and I go through that process and then after that I let them have more freedom on their own and that is how I did the animal one. When Teacher A says, ["and then after that I let them have more freedom on their own"], I take it that she senses a dilemma in attempting to project a standard of normal physical conditions while concurrently inviting the children to work on their own with a material that is likely to bring about a deterioration in conditions. Teacher E explained to me that some teachers wait for favorable weather to do exper-imental art activities. "I know some people wouldn't dream of doing tie-dyeing inside. They do it outside." In this sense priority is given to the maintenance of the standard look of the classroom. Teacher F admitted that while she recognized the domain of experimental art activ-ities, she avoided them because of the multiplicity of demands they create: I sort of "chickened out" on doing things like batik, paper mich6 or easy things they probably would have liked and done a good job on. We didn't do them. I never went, really, into any of those things that I think they could have done and may have enjoyed . . . I thought I didn't know if I could handle the organization of all that, the mess in the classroom when it is not even my classroom, or, in my case, being sure I know how to do it so if anything goes wrong I can help them. Teacher F's remarks suggest the understanding that a ["mess in the classroom"] is inevitable whenever children are invited to experiment. For Teacher F teaching skill in doing experi-mental art activities requires that a teacher be able to manage conditions that are inherently 123 troublesome so that they come out right in the end. In summary, teachers and children as members of the school setting are expected to maintain normal physical conditions in the school and accordingly the classroom. The char-acter of the classificatory scheme of art activities is brought under the influence of what it means to maintain an appearance of routine physical orderliness in the classroom. The requirement that standard physical conditions in the classroom be maintained warrants the choice of structured art activities over experimental ones. Structured art activ-ities are described by teachers in the study as protecting the standard look of the classroom. It seems that over time teachers come to appreciate art activities which reinforce action in a bounded space. Maintenance of an overall uniformity of response in relationship to mate-rials, tools, and other objects in the setting permits teachers to delineate what will be recog-nized as compliant or noncompliant behavior. For experimental art activities, an extensive amount of work is considered to be re-quired to maintain normal physical conditions. Whenever children are invited to govern choice of action, the pace and flow of action, and the use of objects in such action, condi-tions are perceived as likely to disintegrate. Teachers appear to find it more difficult to monitor children's action in order to sustain physical conditions. However, the inefficiency is located with the children who take up the task of experimenting and not with the teaching role. What teachers know about children and experimental art activities ["we had a tremendous mess"] invites the conclusion that they be undertaken only under ideal circum-stances. The requirement to sustain a standard physical appearance in the classroom rein-forces the use of structured art activities. Thematic Content and Stylistic Form of Art In the preceding sections of the present Chapter I attempted to describe how the programmatic character of art as a relevant part of the school day is managed and made recognizable through the synchronization of an aggregate of action and the organization of objects in such action. It was suggested that the choice of structured art activities over 124 experimental ones guides the programmatic character of art when the features of the former are believed to sustain the pacing and phasing of action and normal physical conditions. I will now discuss how teachers make recognizable the programmatic character of art through the use of a content and stylistic form of art accepted by them as having wide cultural ap-peal. This form of art serves also to control action in art. That is, the content and style serve to sustain the coordination of action and the use of objects to such action. Having an approved content and stylistic form of art is believed to be one way of sustaining children's participation in an aggregate of action. Teachers suggest that children are more inclined to enter cooperatively into an art activity when the theme is approved by the children and their family. The requirement to sustain a programmatic effect warrants the use of a content and stylistic form of art that motivates involvement. A finished art product that children want to take home stands as an indicator of a teacher's success in choosing a content and stylistic form that sustains children's involvement in art. Teacher D uses her role as a parent as a point of reference to emphasize the belief that an integral part of artistic expression in childhood is the acceptance and recognition of a child's art by the family. "Well, being a parent you put it on the fridge for a day or two and then you quietly dispose of i t ." Implied here is understanding that child art does not embody the quality one expects of adult art, but that as a parent one is expected to nurture such expression. The positive recognition of children's art by parents is regarded as critical in sustaining art. Teachers encourage this rapport by choosing what they believe to be a cul-turally approved content and stylistic form of art. Marilyn will say, "My mum puts it on the fridge for three days. Then after three days I have to decide whether I want to keep it in my drawer of stuff or if it can go out. Then when summer time comes I'm allowed to pick five things from the year and the rest has to go out." Like the owls, two or three of the kids have come back and said, "My Mum really liked it," or "My Mum wants the pattern for it," or, "My Mum took it and we've got it framed and now it's hanging in my bedroom" and things like this. That Marilyn's mum ["really liked"] the owl and wants to display it strengthens the teacher's position in motivating the entire class in art. An approved content and style of representing art is thought to ensure the likelihood that children will participate in and 125 complete a task and take it home. To characterize the situation when children refuse to take art home, teachers have coined the phrase garbaging art. It suggests a deficiency in children's motivation as a result of conditions at home. These conditions are viewed as standing in the way of a normal course of action in art. Teacher D says: Instead of taking them home, they'll garbage them until I make an issue of it by saying, "This one has to go home." The character of this kind of behavior is disruptive when children garbage their art before the art class is over or when they leave their art around the school, calling into question a teacher's competence in managing the task. Teacher E makes the comment: The sad part is a lot of children don't take their art work home unless you really insist it goes home. A lot of them are most eager to just chuck it in the gar-bage. When Teacher E says, ["the sad part"] I take it she is referring to the life style characteris-tics of children that interfere with the presumed natural propensity of children to want to take home whatever they have done in school. Further to this, teachers indicate that experimental art activities where children are expected to take control over the thematic content of art and its stylistic form instills in children less assurance about taking art home. In a number of instances discussed earlier in the section "The Pacing and Phasing of Action in Art ," children were described as unwilling to participate in experimental art activ-ities. When left on their own to choose a thematic content and stylistic form of their art, some children resorted to copying, tracing, or other uncooperative behavior ["I can't do this"], ["I can't possibly do this"], ["Can you do this for me?"], ["Can you help me with this?"], and ["I'm not even going to try"]. Teachers suggest that incongruous behavior is likely to occur whenever children are invited to find for themselves the content and stylistic form of their art. Furthermore, this apprehensiveness about doing art is thought to increase whenever children are requested to take work home. On one occasion Teacher A and I were discussing children in the class who were afraid to undertake experimental activities: 126 I think that they feel insecure about it and want to avoid it rather than take a chance on experimenting and not have it turn out. They would rather copy the tried and true especially when its something for mother or something in that line. They are not worried who they are making this for because I've never put a label to it. They are just doing it. Being required to take home an art product, the content and style of which does not appear to be culturally approved, is seen as inhibiting children's effort in art. By ["have it turn out"] I take it that Teacher A is suggesting that doing art and taking it home is en-sured when the thematic content and stylistic form is predetermined by the teacher to be culturally approved. Children are understood to rely on and prefer structured art activities with approved content and style. On one occasion, Teacher D had the children assemble an owl from paper hearts. This structured art activity was seen as a decorative piece meant to be hung on the wall. Teacher D said: "The kids enjoyed those and took them home right away." Teachers sug-gest, however, that while experimental art activities will more than likely be thrown away, structured art activities with a recognizable and approved content ensure that some art is taken home. T E A C H E R D : I try to ensure that they have, say, two to four pieces that will be kept. I also feel that they should have involvement with the other ones even if they do end up in the garbage . . . to give them some feeling of painting and whatnot. Even though it doesn't go home, they really love to paint. Structured art activities the content and stylistic form of which draw upon seasonal and cultural themes such a Springtime, Father's Day, and Christmas and include characters such as Garfield and Snoopy (Appendix J) are given as an approved content and stylistic rendering that fosters the effort of children in art. Teacher D characterizes the more struc-tured art activities with popular themes that parents approve of as "realistic looking or functional," "has some place in the decor of the home" or "looks really cute." As a way of concluding, two instances will be used to point out how the thematic content and stylistic form of experimental art activities multiplies the demand characteristics of the classroom. I should like to present two instances where the unpredictability of children's responses in art challenges the locus of control in the classroom. Teacher G instructed the children to make 127 a collage. She introduced the theme as "your favorite thing" and attempted to disengage herself from involvement in the assigned task by keeping her instructions brief. "Using up the magazines at the back, cut out all the pictures of anything that is a favorite thing of yours." After the work was completed she had each child say what they had chosen to put on their collage: D O U G : I put on a big sailboat . . . [Doug wants to continue] T E A C H E R G : That's all, I just wanted one so we can go real fast. Matthew? M A T T H E W : I put on girls. T E A C H E R G : Girls, yes. [Pause] Bill what did you put on here? B I L L : I put on a toilet [much unrestrained laughter on the children's part]. T E A C H E R G : I'm scared to ask this, but why? B I L L : For relief [more unrestrained laughter]. In permitting the children to freely experiment Teacher G runs the risk of having to cope with unpredictable outcomes motivated by personal choice. When Teacher G and I discussed the collage activity, she invoked justification for her way of doing experimental art activities by viewing the boys' noncompliant behavior as special cases attributable to what anyone knows about male adolescents of this age who are "getting older and beginning to show in-terest in a few things." Teacher G does not discuss the possibility of ambiguity in an as-signment that sanctions some conduct but not others. In any case, whether the child's behavior is done to test controls or as a genuine attempt to determine content on his own, the response multiplies demand characteristics in the setting. In the following case a child has finished his collage early in the class period and ap-proaches the desk of Teacher G to have his work checked. There are two items worthy of note. Teacher G wishes to use the occasion of children coming to her desk as a device to help children pace and phase their work. However, experimental art activities where there is a variation in response works against this strategy. Scanning procedures that operate effi-ciently for structured art activities are less useful when the content and stylistic rendering is unpredictable and requires an inordinate amount of individual attention to make sense of it. 128 T E A C H E R G : Oh, that's the mountain. This is a cat then? D O U G : A bat. T E A C H E R G : Oh, a bat! You know it looks just like an ordinary cat to me because of its ears. That's why I didn't understand. You know what you could do, too? What is this on the bat, his eyes? Maybe draw pupils or something or some kind of fang. Then the mouth might go here. Maybe you could put a full moon up here. Fi l l up this page. It's good, but I think it looks unfinished. That's good. I have attempted to describe teachers' understanding that structured art activities with a recognizable thematic content and stylistic form strengthens the programmatic character of art by ensuring children's participation in finishing the art product and taking it home. Implied by the remarks of teachers is the understanding that there is a content and stylistic form associated with structured art activities that members of the community (teachers par-ents, children) have come to accept and that knowledge of this fact is useful in ensuring the success of the art teaching task. It is important now to point out instances where par-ents and children do not appear to appreciate the thematic content of structured art activ-ities. It will be shown that teachers nevertheless manage to justify the use of this kind of activity in the face of uncooperative behavior by reinforcing its relevance as an approved way of doing art. In undertaking this discussion, I will refer to circumstances having to do with single parents and, following that, religious affiliation, wherein the life style characteristics of the family become troublesome features that have to be managed in order to sustain the rele-vance of specific themes integral to structured art activities. The persistent resolution to manage these troublesome features points out the significance of structured art activities to teachers. Conversely, the resigned manner in which teachers talk of stubborn conditions that operate against experimental art activities points out the perceived lack of relevance of this kind of activity in actual practice. In the first circumstance teachers are seen attempting to govern the effort of the en-tire class by stressing the importance of Mother's Day and Father's Day themes when some children are without a mother or father to receive the project. In the second circumstance teachers are seen sustaining the effort of the entire class when the religious affiliation of 129 some children and their parents appears to stand in opposition to what is intended by the art activity. What is suggested here is that in justifying these themes teachers are preserving a kind of art activity they have come to appreciate in the context of the school. Expressions, such as "Sometimes on Halloween" or "We often make cards at Christ-mas or Mother's day or Easter . . . " when heard in the context of the classroom where art is undertaken indicate the taken-for-granted association of some cultural events with art. Teacher F relates to me a sense of moral requiredness in selecting structured art activities with popular cultural themes that appeal to children: T E A C H E R F : I feel obligated to get something new and different for them to do just because it is a particular time of the year. I feel as if there is pressure. The kids expect to do something. At Christmas they would be interested in doing something, so we did. The other pressure was, slightly, that the teachers in Grade three and four like Rachel and Jim would sometimes ask me what I was doing for Mother's Day and then I would think, maybe I ought to be doing something. Over time members of the school have come to accept a content and stylistic form associ-ated with structured art activities. Furthermore, structured art activities sustain the programmatic character of art. In cases where children have experienced the loss of a mother or father, an adjustive effort is required in order to sustain this approved kind of art activity. Teacher G says: The other thing in here that you have to work around . . . for example, let's say Father's Day is coming up. There's some of the kids whose fathers are not living with them. They either divorced or he just left or they have died. You have to really, really be careful. The kids are old enough to accept the fact that their dad is gone, but you still have to watch. It would be useless to give them a project that the teacher would insist that they did a Father's Day card be-cause that doesn't fit in here. In this episode, Teacher G makes reference to occasions where an adjustive effort is required in the everyday context of the classroom in order to sustain the routine course of events and avoid possible disruption. Father's Day, as it is tied to structured art activities, is for Teacher G an unquestionable thematic content. That ["you have to work around"] a problem indicates Teacher G's acknowledgement of the special cases of children with de-mand characteristics that require adjustment to this preferred theme. Teacher G relates to me how she is able to maintain the requirement for this kind of art activity. 130 I don't know, we are not going to do cards. If we do anything for a Father's Day project, I'm just going to suggest they give it to a grandpa or uncle. That's what Margaret said. That makes a lot of sense. Some of them have step-dads too. What seems to be implied here is Teacher G's recognition of the priority of sustaining this approach to art. That another experienced teacher has been able to accomplish this by asking the children to ["give it to a grandpa or uncle"] provides a way of relating to the occasion ["That makes a lot of sense"]. In this circumstance, it was not a question of whether it is practical to do Father's Day art activities or not, but how to protect the event as an instance of a structured art activity. Teacher D relates to me just such a circumstance when she observes children in her class finishing up their Father's Day art projects: T E A C H E R D : He's a single parent. I said, "You can give it to your uncle or a friend." P A T : Does that present a problem on Father's Day? T E A C H E R D : It depends on the class. This class didn't find it a problem when I said, "You keep it yourself or give it to somebody else." It was fine but other classes I've had would say, "I would rather make something else." So they make something else and don't even bother with Father's Day. It depends on how recent the break-up has been whether the kids want to make anything at all and give it to somebody else when father is not around. Teacher D is able to sustain the use of structured art activities by viewing the children's cir-cumstances as special cases. The children in this circumstance are invited to find solutions to the task through the directive ["give it to a grandpa or uncle"] and ["you keep it yourself or give it to somebody else"] (Appendix K ) . In order to justify the use of this structured art activity, Teacher D reasons that children's refusal to reinterpret the situation can be de-termined by ["how recent the break-up has been"] thus providing her with justification for not regarding these children as stubborn, difficult, or a threat to the orderly course of events. When Teacher D says, ["It depends on how recent the break-up has been"], there appears to be an expectation that the normalcy of events will be fully restored as time goes on. In concluding, we must consider the special adjustive effort necessary when children assert that some cultural themes stand in opposition to their religious beliefs. Teacher A says: 131 Well, what I do with them, I try to have a talk with the parents and I ask them what the score is and I say, "Let the child know what they can do and what they can't do." I tell them the value of what we are doing and I let them know a lot of art will be done at Halloween and Valentine's Day . . . at Christmas you are cutting out bells and trees and all these things and what I do is if they say to me, "I can't do it."I try to be prepared with something extra . . . But I let the parents realize too that you can't teach . . . give everybody individual things. Teacher A acknowledges a special situation having to do with the belief systems of children who do not recognize special cultural events. In this circumstance, she appeals to a more immediate order of priorities by establishing her right to control conditions in the classroom wherein children are expected to act cooperatively in coordinating their actions towards an expected outcome ["I let the parents realize too that you can't teach . . . give everybody in-dividual things"]. On one occasion where children were assigned the task of doing Easter baskets Teacher A emphasizes the point that full participation of the class is expected: Anyway these kids were saying "we knew we couldn't have a basket," so whether they took them home . . . I have seen them in the past just leave them here. They don't take the baskets home. There was one basket left over but I couldn't decide whose it was so I don't know. If they took it home noth-ing ever came back. In this case, Teacher A explicates the adjustive effort made by her and the children wherein each is able to sustain a sense of their own orientation, and as a consequence behavior is viewed to be for all practical purposes acceptable. Children whose religious affiliation does not permit them to recognize certain cultural events are seen complying with the teacher's directive to do art. Likewise, they acknowledge a respect for their religious affiliation by not taking the Easter art projects home. Teacher A sustains her position by not inquiring as to who the students are who left their art in the classroom. In this last episode Teacher G discusses the possibility of socially uncooperative be-havior among some children as it relates to religious affiliation. Teacher G's account dem-onstrates how the art teaching task is managed when there are potentially disruptive cases at hand. T E A C H E R G : Larry sits behind Tim in the second row there. He is a (reli-gious affiliation) and so when we do projects that deal with any season like Christmas or Easter, he's not allowed to do them. That is very, very 132 frustrating sometimes. He did an Easter egg. It ended up being an Easter project but it started out to be a Mother's Day project that I hoped to get done by Easter. It was a recipe book. Each of the kids were given an egg that they had to color. This is an example where they did it all on their own and I gave a few pointers as far as outlining in black. I really stressed bright colors. What we did was, we mounted it on manilla tag, sent it away and it came back laminated. Both sides were covered in that clear plastic. They each paid a quarter to get it done. This was a surprise for a mum or an aunt or a grandma. They each brought a recipe and had to do a recipe on this page here. Larry gave me a lot of flak. He would not do it and I got really mad at him. I said, "That is ridiculous." P A T : When you started to give him some flak did you realize why he was doing it? T E A C H E R G : Oh, yeah, I know why. He uses his religion as an excuse a lot of the time and it is really hard to work around. What he told me was that he couldn't do it because it was against his religion. I said, "That's ridiculous, you eat food, don't you?" so we had a big talk and what we decided was that he would not feel comfortable doing this, the egg cover. I said, "That's fine. I'm going to give you this blank oval page and you make your own cover, but you are still going to do the recipe book with us." So that's what we did. I don't know where his is in here, but he brought a recipe and things were fine. See, something like that, I really have to work around. And he was really stubborn. Teacher G relates to me how in this circumstance she attempts to redefine the art activity making it recognizable as one that anyone would accept: ["I said, That's ridiculous, you eat food, don't you?"]. Here the thematic content undergoes a shift in meaning by re-defining it as a possible art activity for Larry regardless of religious affiliation. The child is persuaded to do the art activity on the grounds that anyone could see the plain fact of this project as many things including a recipe book. When Larry is unresponsive to Teacher G's redefinition of the content, there is a further adjustive effort: ["That's fine, I'm going to give you this blank oval page and you make your own cover, but you are still going to do the recipe book with us."] That Larry finally does the art activity as a recipe book is evi-dence of the fact that that both he and the teacher have had to make an adjustive effort. Although the art activity was clearly announced as an Easter project, Larry was made out to be unreasonable in thinking of it solely as an Easter project. When Teacher G says, ["something like that I really have to work around"] I take it that Teacher G does not re-gard these circumstances as so disruptive that the use of structured art activities and their thematic content is threatened. 133 In the above instances the features that characterize the life style of some children and their families can be seen standing as a potential threat to art as a routine course of events. However, the experiencing of these conditions on a regular basis, the risks associated with them, and the justification used to overcome them as problems enforces the high order priority of structured art activities. Teachers in the study suggest that the content and style of art associated with struc-tured art activities is locally approved by members of the community (teachers, parents, children) and that knowledge of this fact is useful in ensuring the success of the art teach-ing task. An approved thematic content and stylistic rendering of imagery is given to moti-vate children's involvement in art. When life style characteristics of the children and their families create troublesome conditions in the classroom during structured art activities, teachers were seen managing the situation in order to sustain the relevance of specific themes integral to this kind of activity. The persistent management of these stubborn features stands to point out the significance of structured art activities. Conversely, the resigned manner in which teachers point out conditions that work against children determining their own content and style of art points out the insignificance of this kind of activity in preserving the programmatic character of art. Teachers express disappointment when children appear unwilling to discern for them-selves the content and stylistic form of their art. Life style characteristics of children, coupled with a poor attitude, are given as reasons why children prefer not to have to deter-mine an acceptable content and stylistic form of art. Children are regarded as feeling less secure about making choices for fear that what they do will be frowned upon. Thus structured art activities that are believed to strengthen the programmatic charac-ter of art by ensuring full participation in the event are favored. In summary, the perceived requirement to maintain the programmatic effect of art warrants the use structured art activities and, as a consequence, determines the content and stylistic form of children's art in the classroom. 134 Assessment of Effort in Art Teachers in the study discussed how they routinely comply with the mandate of the elementary school to make some judgment of the status of children in the school subject Art . The standard scheme of evaluation includes categories of achievement and effort as ways of assessing children's progress across all the subject areas. These categories were seen to appear on children's report cards. In marking on achievement teachers make use of one of a variety of scales to measure children's work. Three different scales were found to be in use, a numerical scale of 1, 2, 3, 4, a descriptive scale of excellent, very good, average, poor, and an alphabetical scale of A , B, C, D . Teachers in the study suggested that they rarely, if ever, gave a child a low or failing mark on achievement. Strong assertions by teachers: "You know I don't get too in-volved in this because I am not a good judge myself," and "I feel it is a matter of opinion," " I have always felt that that is most unfair," "Art , I've never really given it that much feeling for graded evaluation," and "Art , who am I to say if somebody is good or bad?" seem to indicate this to be so. Teachers offered practical reasons why they refrained from giving serious attention to a mark on achievement. Teacher A comments that she does not find the category achievement useful because she is not a good judge of artistic achievement. T E A C H E R A : He seems to have some ideas. I have never thought of him as especially artistic. I should look down my marks that I have and see just where I have graded him. You know I don't get too involved in this be-cause I am not a good judge myself and I feel it is a matter of opinion. So I never mark them down, but I do in my book say how many fairs, very goods that I consider. Teacher A prefers not to have to mark children on achievement in art. To mark on achieve-ment is believed to require a defensible argument on the quality of the finished art product. She feels that her opinion of a child's art might not stand up in a situation where it would have to be defended. Teacher E reasons that grading the child's art is unfair: I have always felt that that is most unfair, especially at elementary—I can't speak for the older grade levels because I am not sure exactly what they do in the areas of art, but in elementary I really hated to say that this child's work 135 was an A , this child is a D , because I think a child would be crushed to have a D in art. Teacher G thinks that the attitude of people in general is that a mark on achievement is of very little consequence in the subject Art : There's Math and Social, Language Arts and Science. These are the four core subjects. In this school, to get honors, you have to get a one in each of those. Then all the other subjects would be like Health, Phys. Ed. , Art, Music and any options. Those are considered noncore subjects. In the above instances teachers assert their understanding that the category achieve-ment does not appear to be of much practical importance to the subject Art. If teachers feel that a mark on achievement has less relevance to the subject Art, how do they make recognizable a mark on effort as an approved way of engaging in the task of evaluation? How does the work that children do constitute making an effort? An effort in art is recognizable and approved in respect to what teachers are willing to accept on occasion as action sustaining the programmatic character of art. Teacher E's statement in this matter bears repeating: T E A C H E R E : I suppose that is the way we operate, which has its advantages and disadvantages. You do want them to have a finished product, because part of art, I feel is, you start something, you work at it, you see it through to the finish; it is important to finish what you start. The degree to which children are seen managing their action to sustain the programmatic character of art constitutes what can be seen as making an effort. A number of instances will be referred to below which indicate that teachers determine to what extent an action can be seen as making an effort in terms of how well it conforms to the above program. Teacher D describes to me how children's action can be seen as not making an ef-fort. T E A C H E R D : Now that I look at it, the kids that are at the threes usually are the ones that don't bother doing any projects. Mainly they've just been fooling around. Maybe they aren't motivated enough. They're ones that couldn't care less about trying it. Well, any old thing will do; scribble, mess, "Here it is". No effort, no conscious thought gone into the project or no detail. Say, if you asked them to draw a man or something they'd end up with a stick man, or a horse would be a stick horse. The ones that just don't seem to comprehend anything you've tried to do. Maybe it's more discipline, I guess. The ones that, rather than do the project, just cause trouble. 136 As implied by the above remarks, we can say that lack of effort means not ["trying"] or ["doing any projects"]. In view of earlier remarks, this seems to suggest that making an effort means to be seen following a course of programmatic action. The remark ["scribble, mess, here it is"] suggests a breakdown in programmatic action. Non-participation in a programmatic course of action determines one to be ["trouble"] and needing ["discipline"]. Teacher A uses the child's conduct in not finishing a task assignment to point out a lack of effort. T E A C H E R A : But one mother came to me and said, "I don't like this mark my daughter has got here on her art. I know that she can draw." I went across it and there were some marks that were maybe, good, and then there were blanks. I said, "Well, she hasn't finished some work or else she is missing that much school. I can't give her a good mark if she wasn't here to do the piece of art or if she never finished it, that counts too." So I am always glad I keep my record because you never know when somebody will question you. Now, I can't remember each piece these children do at all. I have to have something to refresh my memory. When a child is not present ["she is missing that much school"] or when she ["hasn't finished some work"], the action is taken as a lack of effort. Work that is unfinished suggests that the child has not made an effort to synchronize her or his action with the rest of the class. Teacher F describes how a child can be seen making very little effort in art: He puts in very little effort. He starts with the assumption that it's not going to be very good and that it is not worth doing. He certainly thinks it is not going to be any good. He loses it even though he had an Art folder. He was the one who most often lost his things between classes. In this situation Teacher F locates characteristics of a child who is negligent in complying with standard classroom routines. That the child finds the art activity to be ["not worth doing"], and ["he loses it"] constitutes for the teacher the notion that he is not making an effort. When I discussed evaluation of the subject Art with Teacher G , she explained that in art, it is done differently. She preferred not to evaluate on achievement. Not in art. What I do is I give them a poor, average or excellent. Often, 111 write down something, "needs discipline," "seldom brings materials." IH write that down and that goes right on the report card, "Rushes her work. Seldom brings material." I'll put a comment on it. Art, who am I to say if somebody is good or bad? I just give them a mark, basically for participation and how 137 excited they are about their own work. Things like that. Teacher G , like the other teachers, detects effort in respect to compliance or noncom-pliance and how well children conform to standard classroom routines. Children who do not appear to comply with the teacher's expectations for classroom routine are characterized using terms such as ["needs discipline"], ["seldom brings materials"], and ["Rushes her work"]. These characteristics stand in noncompliance of the pacing and phasing of the orderly course of events in the school day. A record made available for parents, children, and school personnel to see ["I'll write that down and that goes right on the report card, 'Rushes her work'"] operates as a device to ensure cooperation in the classroom. With structured art activities teachers more clearly discern what action is recognizable as making an effort. This is to suggest that compliant behavior is recognizable as the extent to which children are seen conforming to a predetermined script for action. The notion of effort as it is understood in the context of the school operates as a device governed by whether action is determinable as compliant or noncompliant. Structured art activities are approved over experimental art activities when they make recognizable what can be taken as an effort or a lack of it. Activities such as copying, coloring-in, tracing, cutting and pasting, and stenciling minimize the demand characteristics of the setting by delimiting what will be taken as acceptable of unacceptable action. It is in this sense that the task of evalu-ation in the subject Art becomes a reasonable undertaking. The notion of what constitutes effort in regard to experimental art activities is ob-scure in practice. As indicated, children appear to find it difficult to determine what action will be tolerated in a situation where there is an invitation to experiment. For example, when children are left on their own to discern the thematic content and stylistic form of art, solutions such as copying, tracing, and asking for help are regarded as unacceptable be-havior in the context of experimental art activities. No matter whether children's intent was to seek assistance in resolving what to do or to test controls, the action that results tends to be regarded as an unacceptable effort. Experimental art activities intended to lead to diverse outcomes among the group of children invoked a sense of vagueness about its requirements. 138 Marking on effort when used in conjunction with structured art activities operates as a device to keep in check the character of art by reporting on action that is compliant or noncompliant. This kind of reporting done as a way of informing children, parents, and school personnel of the child's status in art stands to reinforce and reward action that complies with normal routines. The programmatic character of art plays a role in determin-ing how evaluation is understood in the classroom. Summary The present chapter began with a statement of the principal relevancies governing the art teaching task as follows: 1. When properly programmed, an art task guides the synchronization of an aggregate of recognizable and approved action, and 2. The use of the art classificatory scheme of structured and experimental art activities in practice is contingent on maintaining this programmatic course of action. This chapter was given to demonstrate how teachers in the study sustain the programmatic character of art as an integral part of the school day through the use of features of the setting which, when managed, are taken to minimize unapproved outcomes and sustain ap-proved ones. Four features which teachers give attention to in making recognizable the programmatic character of art were used as themes for discussion. These themes were pre-sented as follows: (1) The Pacing and Phasing of Action in Art, (2) The Physical Condi-tion of the Setting, (3) The Thematic Content and Stylistic Form of Art, and (4) The Assessment of Effort. The features chosen for discussion were found to make apparent the strategies teachers in the study use in reconciling the use of structured and experimental art activities with the need for a programmatic course of action. Structured and experimental art activities as alternative ways of doing art and the consequences of choosing one line of action over the other were examined in this chapter in respect to the way they become warranted. As a way of summarizing this chapter, discussion will focus on teachers' views that structured art activities sustain the programmatic character of art and that experimental art activities were taken to be less effective. 139 The programmatic character of art is described as recognizable and approved as seg-ments of action unfolding in a predictable sequence in conformity with a specified period of time. In an aggregate of action children ["start something"], ["work at it"], ["finish"] what they ["start"], and show evidence of ["a finished product"]. Structured art activities are believed to sustain the programmatic character of art in practice by avoiding any notion that a finished art product and the methods that go into its production cannot be undertaken in a concerted way in the time specified. The implication is that the act of making art and the effort required to sustain the effort can be coordi-nated in respect to a given time constraint. Structured art activities derive from a belief in the child's inability to pace and phase action in art in a specified period of time and favor a predetermined course of action initi-ated by the teacher. An exemplary art product and a precise set of instructions for its pro-duction serve as a kind of script meant to engage an entire class in a predictable course of action. Simplified methods of art production such as copying, coloring-in, tracing, cutting and pasting, and stenciling associated with structured art activities become warranted as depersonalized action likely to sustain a synchronization of an aggregate of action in art. Simplifying the art process places limitations on the possible variations in response that will be accepted, thereby ensuring a uniform effect across the entire class. Delimiting the kinds of responses that are acceptable permits teachers to act with confidence in scanning the class for action that stands out. As well, teachers found that they were better prepared to assist children in bringing their work in line with the rest of the class. The requirement to sustain the pace and flow of an aggregate of action seems to per-petuate an enduring need for an orientation toward structured art activities. The recognition and use of this kind of art activity seems to perpetuate a notion of art as predetermined action unfolding in predictable fashion over time. Children learn early on in school to adjust their action in accordance with the in-tended meaning underlying the use of objects in the setting. It is the projection of this meaning that sustains the programmatic character of art. One teacher suggested that 140 recognition of action as part of a plan to maintain the larger organizational scheme of the school was dutifully binding of all members of the setting. Teachers become aware that in working in close proximity of other members of the school setting, they are required to maintain a standard appearance in the classroom. The organizational structure of a classroom where art is undertaken is protected when teachers are able to manage the action in art and its objects with a respect for standard physical conditions. The requirement that standard physical conditions in the setting be maintained warrants the use of structured art activities over experimental ones. Structured art activities with an exemplary art product and/or a precise set of instruc-tions for assembly serve as a script delimiting action and the use of objects. Art materials and tools function in a space bounded by the physical configuration of the desk. The desk is a pivotal point of action and, along with the accompanying art materials, tools, and in-structions implies a depersonalized course of action. The need to maintain action that is of a predictable and depersonalized kind reinforces the use of structured art activities. Teachers have come to accept certain content and stylistic forms of art—those that sustain the programmatic character of art. Structured art activities with a recognizable and culturally approved content and stylistic form strengthen the programmatic character of art by making clearly discernible to children what the expectations are for the task. As well, it is suggested by teachers that children are more inclined to enter cooperatively into an art activity when it has been established that the content and style is approved by the commu-nity (teachers, parents, children). A finished art product that children want to take home stands as an indication of a teacher's success in choosing a content and stylistic form that ensures children's involvement. Structured art activities, the content and style of which draw upon seasonal and popular themes such as springtime, Father's Day, and Christmas and characters such as Garfield and Snoopy, are given as an approved way of fostering the ef-fort of children. The need to sustain the programmatic character of art justifies the use of themes as a device to encourage involvement in art. The presence of structured art activities seems to 141 perpetuate a notion of the subject Art as a programmed course of action. That teachers are able to find justification for the use of these themes when the life styles of some children and parents stand in opposition to their use serves to point out the high order priority of this kind of art activity in the elementary school. The standard scheme of evaluation for elementary school subjects includes categories of achievement and effort. Teachers suggest that in art they prefer to mark on effort rather than achievement. The category achievement is not regarded as being of importance to the subject Art . An effort in art is recognizable and approved in respect to what teachers are willing to accept on occasion as action sustaining the programmatic character of art. That is, an effort in art is recognizable as the extent to which children can be seen to ["start something"], ["work at it"], ["finish"] what they ["start"], and show evidence of ["a fin-ished product"]. When used in conjunction with structured art activities the act of evaluat-ing for effort operates as a device keeping in check the programmatic character of art by reporting on action that is compliant or noncompliant. This kind of reporting done as a way of informing children, parents, and school personnel of the child's status in art stands to reinforce and reward action that complies with normal routine. Activities such as copying, coloring-in, tracing, cutting and pasting, and stenciling minimize the demands of the setting by delimiting what will be taken as acceptable action in art. Structured art activities are ap-proved over experimental art activities when they invite a teacher to discern the status of an observed action by referring it to a standard program of action in art. For experimental art activities, teacher intervention in the nature of the art product and its method of production is intended to be withheld. An environment free of teacher intervention is seen as an ideal by teachers in the study. It is believed that children should be able to enter spontaneously into art in a manner seen as natural to childhood. Yet teachers express disappointment with attempts to implement this ideal in actual practice. They note cases of children who are unwilling or unable to appreciate what it means to ex-periment and contribute to a disintegration of the order of the classroom. 142 When left on their own children seemed to ignore the control structure ["start some-thing"], ["work at it"], ["finish"] what they ["start"] and show evidence of ["a finished product"]. That is, for experimental art activities, there is a greater likelihood that the be-havior of some children will fail to conform to expectations. What is problematic about the invitation to experiment is the expectation that children will be guided by the same set of undeclared priorities as the teacher. That children are "to some extent" expected to concert their action independently of the teacher while being guided by the same set of priorities is the crux of the problem. The manner in which children negotiate a fit between the oppor-tunity to experiment and the requirement to maintain order in the classroom is regarded by teachers to often produce questionable results. Children are understood to use the notion of freedom of expression as a means to obtain results in a manner contrary to what teachers expect. Behavior such as child-initiated copying, tracing, and asking the teacher for help which are regarded as acceptable for structured art activities become problematic when viewed in the context of an invitation to experiment. No matter whether the intention was to seek assistance in resolving what to do or to test controls, the action that results is re-garded as too permissive. This lack of concerted action seems all but guaranteed whenever children are invited to enter spontaneously into art without a clearly delineated plan of action. While any one instance such as a child asking for a model to copy would not in it-self be regarded as a failure of a teacher to do her work competently, there is a concern that a number of instances escalating over time would call into question teacher compe-tence. The requirement to sustain the pace and flow of an aggregate of action, coupled with present conditions where the behavior of certain children tends to stand out, perpetuates teachers' tendency to withhold experimental art activities. Teachers express a concern that normal physical conditions in the classroom are likely to deteriorate whenever experimental art activities are undertaken. The teaching task focused on making the environment childproof as a way of protecting the standard look of the classroom against conditions resulting when children moved out of the depersonalized state of isolation experienced in structured art activities. Further to this, the extraordinary effort 143 needed to protect the setting was given as a time-consuming way of overcoming the prob-lem teachers seem to have in monitoring individual action that tends to lead to a deteriora-tion in physical conditions. Protection of the physical setting ["we covered the floor"] is regarded by teachers as a likely solution to the inevitable ["mess"] that occurs whenever this kind of art activity is undertaken. The problem is located in the child who takes up the task and not in the teaching. In instances where the need to maintain the setting imposed con-straints on the doing of art, teachers located the deficiency in the child's skill and not with the practical wisdom of undertaking this kind of art activity in an environment with limited resources and facilities. The extraordinary amount of work required to sustain normal physi-cal conditions seems to justify the stance that experimental art activities could be under-taken only when conditions in a setting were ideal. When left on their own to choose the thematic content and stylistic form of art, some children were described as resorting to copying, tracing, and other behavior regarded as uncooperative ["I can't do this"], ["I can't possibly do this"], ["Can you do this for me?"], ["Can you help me with this?"], and ["I'm not even going to try"]. This kind of be-havior attributed to the attitude, habits, and life style characteristics of the children is be-lieved to multiply the demand characteristics in the setting. For example, apprehensiveness about the choice and rendering of the content and stylistic form of art is believed by teachers to increase when children believe that they will be asked to take their art home. Children are thought to feel more assured about undertaking a task the content and stylistic form of which is culturally approved and tried and tested over time. Thus control over the programmatic character of art is less certain and teachers tend to see such action as inhibit-ing the routine undertaking of art. The notion of what constitutes an effort in respect to experimental art activities ap-pears in practice to be obscure. Children were described as finding it difficult to determine what action would be tolerated in a situation where there is an invitation to experiment. When left on their own to choose the thematic content and stylistic form of art, solutions such as copying and tracing and asking for help that were acceptable behavior for 144 structured art activities became unacceptable. No matter if the child was endeavoring to re-solve the problem on his or her own or testing controls, teachers tend to see such action in the context of experimental art activities as inhibiting the programmatic character of art. 145 CHAPT E R VII S U M M A R Y OF T H E S T U D Y , IMPLICATIONS, AND R E C O M M E N D A T I O N S FOR F U R T H E R STUDY Introduction This final chapter will present a summary statement of the materials presented in pre-vious chapters. Following this, concluding remarks will be put forward. Implications of the findings and recommendations for further study will be presented. Summary of the Study Art educators often decry the state of disjuncture in the field of art education where-in what gets done in an elementary school as art appears to resist curriculum developers' and legislators' efforts to reform art in school stands in opposition to what scholars believe about how art should be taught. A review of literature revealed that two reasons are com-monly put forward by art educators to explain this sense of disjuncture. First, art education orientations and the associated research and scholarship were represented as having been less than successful in disclosing to teachers in the field what art educators regard as education-ally relevant. A child-centered orientation to teaching lauds freedom of creative expression while ignoring the school as an institutional structure that has historically valued compliance with authority. The child-centered orientation that was understood one way in the context of art education, when left to the teacher to interpret, is seen differently. Similarly, it was argued that curriculum guides, textbooks, and other reading matter supporting a discipline-centered orientation do not make the intended meaning and purpose of art education sufficiently clear. Art education research and scholarship have been strongly criticized on the basis that their theoretical assumptions could not be translated into classroom practice as intended. Second, a further review of literature disclosed that several writers contend that 146 lack of success in implementing art education orientations is a direct result of the school art style, an in-school produced orientation standing in opposition to what art educators hold to be correct. This is not dissimilar to criticism of work in other subjects in the curriculum. The general lack of success in efforts to revise teaching orientations in subjects other than art are also attributable to conditions perceived to arise in the context of teaching in the classroom setting. The difficulty of adapting theoretical orientations to the classroom setting is seen as located in conditions that arise because of the organizational structure of the school. What these studies indicate is taken to hold true of the teaching of art. The results suggest that studies of teaching must be broadened in their scope to include all those fea-tures of the classroom setting deemed relevant to the outcome of teaching by teachers. In this study, I determined to examine features of the teaching task and the strategies a teacher uses in making such features recognizable as locally approved ways of accomplishing the teaching and learning of art. In Chapter II I focused on the work of Schutz (1962, 1964, 1966, 1970) and Garfinkel (1963, 1967) for an elaboration of the commonsense practices members of a setting use to make recognizable an approved course of action. I concluded that commonsense knowledge representing the members' grasp of the perceived normality of events can be described using the following three properties: the natural attitude that asserts the facticity of an object, action, or event; the stock of knowledge which idealizes the who, what, when, and where of experience; and, finally, commonsense reasoning as the guiding process enabling one to overcome individual differences which might arise and stand in the way of the perceived sense of a world known in common. Examples of the use of commonsense knowledge were described as being available in descriptive accounts by means of which an individual says in so many words what can be made of a particular object, action, or event. The purpose of Chapter III was to explain the significance of the questions which guide the study. The questions for this study were generated using the theoretical conception of commonsense knowledge developed in Chapter II. I stated the questions in a way that 147 would make the study more than a superficial pursuit of a teacher's stock of knowledge. The natural attitude that asserts the facticity of objects, actions, and events permitted me as a researcher to assume and ask about the character of a teacher's orientation to the teaching of art. A question of this kind motivated me to ask and to expect to find that when art is undertaken it is indeed informed by an orientation or set of guidelines. Viewing the stock of knowledge as idealizations of who, what, when, and where led me to inquire about the orientation of individual teachers, and the contingencies of any current situation that shapes an orientation. Further to this, a conception of commonsense reasoning as the strategy used in overcoming the simultaneous experiencing of the world as personal percep-tion and world known in common invite the examination of the teaching experience for the strategies a teacher uses to make her or his work recognizable and approved. This question permitted me to inquire about the kind of work done by individual teachers to sustain their orientation. In Chapter IV I described the way I obtained permission to do the study in two public school systems in the Province of Alberta. Six elementary school teachers agreed to be par-ticipants in the study. I selected observation and interview strategies as general modes of in-quiry. The majority of the interviews and a number of the art class sessions were audiotape recorded. It was explained how all the the audiotape recordings were transcribed for the purpose of analysis, and that taken together these transcripts of the tapes and field notes filled over 600 typewritten pages of descriptive data. I also undertook to describe and demonstrate the use of two interpretive schemes for analyzing data. These are the Documentary Method of Interpretation and its constitutive practices the Interpretive Procedures. I described how repeated readings of the transcripts and notes as well as sustained observation and interviews, were taken to reveal a coherent stock of knowledge which individual teachers use as an advisory set of guidelines. My task as a researcher was to link teacher-described features with an underlying pattern or guideline discovered in teachers' descriptive accounts. The demonstration of the use of the Interpretive Procedures as constituent practices of the Documentary Method of 148 Interpretation reported in Chapter IV permitted me to explicate the strategies teachers use to make sense of a situation. The use of these strategies and their characteristic features in Chapter IV was intended to provide an opportunity for the reader to observe how the Documentary Method of Interpretation and the Interpretive Procedures were used. I con-cluded that data would be found to be referentially adequate when the reader is able to find in the instances referred to a feature and an assembled context which mutually elaborate one another. This mutual elaboration was accepted by the researcher as constituting teaching strategy making obvious art as an approved course of action. The purpose of Chapter V was to address the first two of the three questions put forward in Chapter III: What is the character of the art teaching task as it is disclosed in descriptive accounts given by an elementary school teacher? What is the teacher's stock of knowledge which informs and is informed by the art teaching task? Art teaching was revealed as a coherent stock of knowledge used by teachers as a set of guidelines for teaching. Chapter V described this stock of knowledge as sets of guidelines which teachers consult in their everyday work. The significance of these guidelines was dem-onstrated in Chapter VI where they were shown to serve as a backdrop to demonstrate the strategies teachers use to make them recognizable. As a way of setting the stage for Chapter VI , Chapter V put forward the advisory set of guidelines and as well the authorita-tive sources which inform the guidelines. Reference was made by the researcher to the Art Curriculum Guide, Department of Education, the Province of Alberta (1969) as an authori-tative resource setting forth elements anticipated as useful in formulating a comprehensive and sequential art program. As well, reference was made to the Handbook for Practicum Programs in the Elementary Schools (1985-1986) which serves as an authoritative resource asserting the necessary requirements sustaining a standard of organizational routine and pro-cedure in the classroom. The Handbook was found to assert the responsibility of teachers for the linear progression of an aggregate of action over the various segments of the school 149 day. Reference to these two authoritiative sources was put forth as a way of referring to two major structures teachers focused on repeatedly in their accounts. Continual reference by teachers to these two authoritative resources was examined as part of individual teachers' efforts to sustain art as an integral part of the school day. It is in this sense that we can speak of the in-school orientation of the good teacher of art. I accepted the fact that it is in the practical circumstances of the school setting that individual teachers learn through ex-perience what it means to manage actions, objects, and events to create a programmatic ef-fect of art as usual in the school day. This strived-for effect on the part of teachers was introduced in Chapter V as the programmatic character of art. Teachers' accounts disclosed two principal relevances which inform the art teaching task and guide the work of the good teacher of art. First, the programmatic character of art necessitates a sequence of distinct segments of action ordered in a predictable fashion over a specified period of time. Action was described by teachers as approved action when it displayed a concerted beginning and end, at a pacing and phasing that respected time constraints and the standard look of the classroom. Knowledge of the art classificatory scheme provided a second resource teachers rou-tinely referred to in making sense of the art teaching task. They described it as comprising structured and experimental art activities. Chapter V was concluded with a statement of two guiding principal relevances that are used to inform the art teaching task. 1. When properly programmed an art task guides the synchronization of an aggregate of recognizable and approved action; and 2. The use of the art classificatory scheme of structured and experimental art activities in practice is contingent on maintaining a programmatic course of action. In Chapter VI , I examined the above statement of relevances. This examination served to address the third question put forth in Chapter III which asked: What are the strategies a teacher uses to make recognizable her or his work as an in-stance of an approved way of accomplishing the art teaching task? In addressing this question, strategies were disclosed of how teachers make recognizable relevances associated with the programmatic character of art and the art classificatory 150 scheme. Teachers repeatedly referred to four features of their experience useful in making recognizable an approved way of dealing with the guidelines described above. These were used as themes for discussion in Chapter VI . These features of the teacher's task which have served as themes for discussion within this study were organized and presented as follows: 1. The Pacing and Phasing of Action in Art, 2. The Physical Condition of the Setting, 3. The Thematic Content and Stylistic Form of Art, and 4. The Assessment of Effort. Chapter VI demonstrated that the character of the art classificatory scheme (that is, the kinds of art chosen and how they are undertaken) is influenced by the practical circum-stances associated with maintaining the programmatic character of art as an integral part of the school day. Teachers disclosed that it is the requirement for a programmatic effect in the school day that conduces to one rather than another kind of art activity. Their practical experience in undertaking art in the school setting determined what the scheme intended and how it was used. The findings suggested that structured art activities as an approach to teaching devel-oped over time in the elementary school setting have come to address practical circum-stances associated with maintaining the programmatic character of art. Demands arising in the setting where art is undertaken appear to have been kept in check through the use of this kind of art activity. Structured art activities were described as a school-like task which address the prob-lem of how to regulate the effort of an aggregate of children over a specified period of time with due respect for the appearance of the setting. This was accomplished through the adoption of a kind of content and stylistic form of art. Using this approach the teaching and learning of art is reduced to a set of instructions for action and the production of an exemplary art product tried and tested over time. Belief in the child's ability to program his or her action in art is suspended in favor of a script that ensures a predictable course of action. Methods of art production such as copying, coloring-in, tracing, cutting and pasting, and stenciling were described by teachers as art processes that laid out the journey to be 151 followed in art in a predictable way. Art processes such as the above guaranteed a routine program of action: ["start something"], ["work at it"], ["finish"] what they ["start"] and show evidence of ["a finished product"]. The simple way in which structured art activities kept children engaged and avoided unpredictable variations in response ensure that the de-mand for the appearance of coordinated action be met. Structured art activities operated as a control device satisfying a demand for sameness in response. As well as providing a script that satisfied the demand for a delineated course of action, the structured art activity was understood by teachers to control the use of objects in such action. There was an overall physical configuration of paper, person, and place sustained by a structured art activity that makes recognizable a uniform appearance in the classroom setting. An art exemplar, a set of instructions, and the bounded space circum-scribed by the child's desk when used as anticipated, reinforce the expected look of order. The thematic content and stylistic form of structured art activities provided a simple way of ensuring participation in art and keeping behavior in control. Resistance to doing art was thought to be overcome by the use of popular cultural themes. Such an approach to art provided both teachers and children with a kind of security in that knowing what-follows-what and where-it-would-end informed what would be acceptable as making an effort in art. I found that teachers understood that a distinguishing feature of experimental art activities had to do with relinquishing control over children's action in art. The success of the activity was indicated to be to some extent the child's responsibility. They suggested that an opportunity to experiment deepened children's awareness of what it personally means to do art by encouraging the child to be more of a task determiner. What seems to make this approach to art ambiguous and vague was given to be in the suggestive nature of the expec-tation to some extent, since it posed the question of what exactly teachers are willing to ac-cept as compliant action. Teachers presupposed that children would be able to achieve the orderly processing of the subject Art independently of teacher intervention. 152 Disappointment with experimental art activities was all but guaranteed by the manner in which the task was introduced. The intentional withholding of a set of instructions and an exemplary art product ordinarily given in structured art activities seemed to leave chil-dren guessing about the mandatoriness of the program: ["start something"], ["work at it"], ["finish"] what you ["start"], and show evidence of ["a finished product"] in the context of an experimental art activity. Teachers' accounts of their experiences in doing this kind of activity suggested that they are not attuned to the consequences of this manner of ap-proach. Teachers attributed the problem to the children and their propensity to use the invi-tation to experiment as an instrumental means to obtain results in a manner contrary to what was expected. Responses to the task such as child-initiated copying, tracing, and asking for help, while regarded as acceptable conduct for structured art activities, became troublesome when seen in the context of an invitation to experiment. For teachers these kinds of incidents seemed to underscore the importance of not leaving the outcome of a task assignment open to chance. Teachers indicated that over time they have learned to re-strain an impetus to do experimental art activities so as to wait until conditions in the set-ting are ideal. Teachers undertook an extraordinary amount of work to protect the normal physical setting against the disarray associated with experimental art activities. Devices for monitor-ing and controlling individual action became ineffective when children were no longer re-quired to operate in an isolated space as they did for structured art activities. That children were unable to appreciate the invitation to experiment in a manner that maintained the standard appearance of the classroom, and that the only way of overcoming this problem was to expend an extraordinary amount of effort protecting the setting, was justification for refraining from this kind of activity until conditions appeared ideal. Children were expected to discern the content and stylistic form of art on their own. Implied by the invitation to experiment was a supposed openness to random experience. Children's choice of action was not always acceptable, however. Copying, tracing, and other noncompliant action: ["I can't do this"], ["I can't possibly do this"], ["Can you do this for 153 me?"], ["Can you help me with this?"], and ["I'm not even going to try"] that threatens to create disorder was attributed to the attitudes, habits, and life style characteristics of the children and not the approach to teaching. No matter if the child was endeavoring to re : solve the problem on his or her own, or testing controls, any action that moved out of a state of depersonalized isolation tended to be seen as having a propensity to inhibit the management of the programmatic character of art. What would count as making an effort in art became ambiguous and vague when children were left to determine what action would be tolerated in a situation that invites freedom of expression. Teachers' accounts of their experience in doing experimental art activities pointed out that a conception of the teaching task in respect to the requirement for a programmatic ef-fect in the subject Art was not clearly understood. It appears that teachers' understanding of freedom of expression and a consequent invitation to children to experiment await the actual undertaking of action in the classroom in order to determine what the invitation to experiment meant or did not mean all along. Concluding Remarks Several concluding remarks from the findings are warranted regarding the relationship between structured and experimental art activities. I will attempt to set in contrast the fea-tures and consequences of each approach to the art teaching task. This undertaking will di-rect attention to the grounds for choosing one approach over the other and assess the possible consequences. Following this, the implications of the findings and recommendations for further study will be proposed. The structured art activity approach is characterized as a school-like task addressing such practical considerations as how to sustain the motivational effort of an aggregate of children over a specified period of time with due consideration of the standard appearance of the organizational setting. What makes this kind of activity take on an appearance of a school art style is its adequacy in meeting the demand for a standard of work efficiency across the school day. Structured art activities have arisen and become institutionalized as a 154 practical orientation to the requirement to do art in a manner appropriate to the way the school day functions. In achieving this outcome, belief in the child's initiative to undertake a course of action in art in a specified period of time is suspended. The adequacy of this kind of art activity is judged in terms of children's involvement in the management of the or-ganizational structure rather than personal achievement in art; and the degree of participa-tion rather than quality. There is little opportunity for children to interact with the structures of the discipline of art or to learn about art on their own. The experimental art activity approach is supported by the belief that an opportunity for children to work while free of teacher intervention deepens their awareness of what it personally means to do art. Empathy and consideration of the child's way of viewing the world seems to be an ideal of this orientation to the art teaching task. Yet teachers' under-standing of exactly what it means to experiment appears to await discovery. It is the actual undertaking of an activity that discloses what the invitation to experiment has meant all along. It seems that outcomes related to sustaining the organizational structure takes priority over art educational outcomes. The structured art activity approach refines action pertaining to the teaching and learning of art by laying out an impersonal journey that children and teachers would take: one knows what-action-follows-what-and-where-it-is-to-end. The use of this course of action reduces the need to attend to simultaneous aspects of the setting. In suspending belief in the child's ability to coordinate his or her action over time, this kind of routinized and depersonalized action in art enables teachers to avoid the intrusion of random action deemed irrelevant to the task. Children's actions center around sustaining the mores of the school day rather than interacting with the art discipline to create and generate their own meanings. The experimental art activity approach purports to accord priority to the child as a task determiner. Control over the pacing and phasing of action is to be given over to the child. What seems to make this approach ambiguous and vague in practice is the expectation that children will devise a course of action on their own that will comply with the 155 mandatoriness of the expectation that one know what-follows-what-and-where-it-all-ends. The intentional withholding of a set of instructions and an exemplary art product as in-structional strategy ordinarily given to children in structured art activities seemed to all but guarantee disappointment on the part of teachers with this kind of art activity. The concept of experimentation, when used in a literal manner without the realization that instructional strategy and a conceptual understanding of this belief are necessary for proper implementa-tion, seems to be responsible for the lack of effectiveness of this approach. This results in it being regarded as inappropriate in most circumstances and underscores the importance of not using an art activity that leaves anything open to chance. The structured art activity approach is intended to introduce in the setting a tried and tested plan of action and to reduce the possibility of disorder resulting from unintended use of objects. A set of instructions for assembling an exemplary art product and the presum-able use of designated objects to such action is intended to guarantee sameness in action, thus maintaining a look of uniformity across the classroom setting. In according the child the role of task determiner for experimental art activities, an extraordinary amount of effort is needed to protect the setting against the unanticipated but likely use of objects in unintended ways. That children are regarded as being unable to ap-preciate the invitation to experiment in a manner that respects the standard appearance of the classroom, and that the only alternative is to expend an extraordinary amount of effort to protect the setting against this inevitable disarray, provides teachers with the grounds for refraining from this kind of activity until conditions appear ideal. The structured art activity approach provides both teachers and children with a preformulated content and stylistic form of art as a way of controlling the orderly outcome of events. This involves the use of a form of art that is locally approved and, of conse-quence therefore, in keeping children engaged in the task in an orderly way. That is, the regulation of content and style serves to keep unintended action in check. In this sense, knowledge of art which children encounter is intimately connected to the observance of the mores of the school day. 156 In contrast, the experimental art activity approach is seen to accord priority to the child as determiner of the content and stylistic form of art. This approach invokes an ar-rangement wherein teachers are willing to go along to some extent with the notion that the child should be given ample opportunity to bring meaning to the event. Teachers seem dis-appointed when children's responses to the task are idiosyncratic and not conducive to sustaining the programmatic character of art as an integral part of the school day. Grounds for teachers refusing to do this kind of art activity until conditions improve lie in their views that children often respond in an idiosyncratic manner, indicating that they cannot think of a content or form, and that they would not try, or that the work displays unacceptable imagery. As well, control devices that seem to work well for structured art activities are less reliable when the content and stylistic form of art are not regulated. The explicit structuring of what-follows-what for structured art activities provide both children and teachers with a reliable way of recognizing what action will be taken as making an effort in art. Effort becomes recognizable as children's submission to what action is for-mally authorized by the mores of the school day and the kind of content and stylistic form of art it approves. The experimental art activity approach as a personalized response to art tends to lead to diverse outcomes among the group of children invoking a sense of vagueness about the requirements of the task. It seems that while the activity invites engagement in personal choice, action is judged to be compliant only if upon observation it can be seen as sustaining a programmatic effect. Yet, in reality, both children and teachers have less op-portunity to rely on stock responses to identical tasks. Confusion is evident when children and teachers have less opportunity to rely on stock responses, and the meaning and rele-vance of action have to be determined anew on each occasion. The structured art activity approach has become technically efficient as a way of rein-forcing art as an integral part of the organizational structure of the school day. It appears to teachers to be a stable and invariable practice responding to the demand of the organiza-tional structure of the setting. This explicit structuring of the task provides teachers with a 157 sense of stability and confidence in their work. Under these circumstances, what is docu-mented as the art product and action leading up to it is understood to be clearly in the teacher's control. Yet the oversimplification of the task for the purpose of stability and order seems misguided in respect to the fundamental purposes for offering the school subject Art. In contrast, teachers who undertook an experimental art activity approach are seen to be more susceptible to trouble. They express concern about sanctions that will be invoked by other members in the school. Use of this approach to art seems to multiply demand charac-teristics by encouraging action that appears to challenge requirements associated with the synchronization of action, the standard appearance of the classroom, and an acceptable con-tent and stylistic form of art. Teachers express a concern that if this kind of art activity is undertaken on a regular basis, teaching competence might be brought into question by those members of the school setting who have come to appreciate, and indeed expect, organization in the school day. Teacher disappointment with this kind of art activity is justified by them on the grounds that children do not appreciate the extraordinary effort of the teacher to accommo-date their interests. Unanticipated and idiosyncratic responses by children leave teachers wondering about the feasibility of an approach that subscribes to chance and risk in teach-ing. The grounds teachers use to discuss why they set this orientation aside indefinitely make little mention of the difficulty children seem to experience when they are left to nego-tiate a fit between the unclarified task, experiment, and the organizational structure of the classroom. It seems that diffuse goals associated with art education orientations and lack of specified ways of implementing them represent a major problem in overcoming the use of structured art activities. Seven significant conclusions have been presented. They bear repeating in view of their significance in the teaching and doing of art: 1. The structured art activity approach is characterized as a school-like task addressing such practical considerations as how to sustain the motivational effort of an aggregate of children over a specified period of time with due consideration of the standard ap-pearance of the organizational setting. . . . Structured art activities have arisen and 158 become institutionalized as a practical orientation to do art in a manner appropriate to the way the school functions. 2. Children's actions center around sustaining the mores of the school day rather than interacting with the art discipline to create and generate their own meanings. 3. The concept of experimentation, when used in a literal manner without the realization that instructional strategy and a conceptual understanding of this belief are necessary for proper implementation, seems to be responsible for the lack of effectiveness of this approach. 4. In according the child the role of task determiner for experimental art activities, an extraordinary amount of effort is needed to protect the setting against the unanticipated but likely use of objects in unintended ways. 5. The explicit structuring of what-follows-what for structured art activities provides both children and teachers with a reliable way of recognizing what action will be taken as making an effort in art. 6. This explicit structuring of the task provides teachers with a sense of stability and confidence in their work. . . . Yet the oversimplification of the task for the purpose of stability and order seems misguided in respect to the fundamental purposes for offering the school subject Art . 7. It seems that diffuse goals associated with art education orientations and lack of spe-cified ways of implementing them represent a major problem in overcoming the use of experimental art activities. The present study has provided a way of observing how individual teachers' strategies for choosing art activities are accomplished with an appreciation of what it takes to main-tain order in the school day. The following statements are put forward as a way of summarizing how the requirements for a programmatic effect across the school day influ-ence a preference for structured art activities over experimental ones. 1. Structured art activities sustain the orderly pace and flow of activities. A taken-f or-granted view of the need for the orderly pace and flow of activities invokes the use of structured art activities. 2. Structured art activities sustain a standard of normal physical conditions. A taken-for-granted view of the requirement for normal physical conditions invokes the use of structured art activities. 3. The content and form of structured art activities sustain the programmatic character of art in the school day. The requirement to maintain the programmatic character of art in the school day invokes the use of a style and form of art generic to its re-quirements. 4. The notion of effort in art functions to sustain the programmatic character of art in the school day. Structured art activities invoke a kind of effort in art that is generic to the requirements for programmed action. In summary there are two major conclusions. 159 First, the choice of structured art activities over experimental ones appears to be at-tributed to two related factors: the taken-for-granted conception of organizational control operating in the school setting, and an unresolved conception of the requirements for exper-imental art activities in the context of this organizational structure. Second, the degree of credibility or affirmation that structured art activities receive from members of the school will continue to remain high as long as teachers' experiences with other orientations to art teaching and learning are less than effective. Over time, struc-tured art activities have proved to be an efficient device for the management of practical circumstances confronting the elementary school teacher. Furthermore, this kind of art activity, approved and taken for granted over time, has come to take on a force of moral necessity. This can be attributed to its distinctive quality in concurrently satisfying the de-mand for order while satisfying the requirement to teach art. As a consequence, there is a sense in which we can say that what is done in art appears not to be open to choice. Implications As indicated, the choice of structured art activities over experimental ones appears to be associated with two related factors: a taken-for-granted conception of organizational control operating in the school setting, and an unresolved conception of the requirements for experimental art activities in the context of this organizational structure. These findings suggest that teachers attempting to implement curriculum with an art education orientation experience a strong sense of disjuncture whenever an attempt is made to bring art education into relationship with the requirements for organization and manage-ment in the school setting. At the heart of this matter seems to be a misguided attempt to approach academic and organizational functions of schools independently of one another. Left unresolved and open to chance, this situation of despair wherein neither the require-ment for order nor the ideals of art education are met satisfactorily has led to the adoption of a school art style as an in-school orientation. 160 What seems to be an over-socialized perception of the way the school day must func-tion is responsible for an in-school ideological basis sanctioning structured art activities. The setting aside by the classroom teacher of ideals, principles, concepts, and techniques of the four parent disciplines of art education—aesthetics, studio art, art history, and art criti-cism—as well as models of art education in a social and cultural context, is a high price to pay for organization and management routines. If the above are the lenses that enable chil-dren to develop a "sophisticated understanding" (Greer, 1984, p. 214) of art, and if there is a requirement that art be taught, and if we have taken for granted the influence of the school setting in achieving the above outcomes, then we should reconsider what we do in light of the present findings. The implication is that, in order to accomplish the expressed goals of art education and overcome what constitutes a conventional, and possibly misguided, practice in the elementary school, we should give more attention to empirically-based analyses of disjuncture such as those reported in the present study. It would seem that where teacher education and curriculum programming are concerned, the organizational structure of the school and the school day can no longer be treated as a vacuous structure or zone of neutrality inconsequential to what is done in the subject Art . Further to this, art education orientations that have attempted to construct realities for the classroom teacher in abstract terms that are not adequate for dealing with the in-school routine practices of daily existence need to be brought into question. Teachers have perhaps been converted to an approach to teaching art in their training that functions primarily as an orderly social view of art teaching and learning without adequate attention to features of the setting that stand to challenge and coerce any attempt to move away from routine practices associated with structured art activities. In treating child art as a nat-urally occurring phenomenon, the child-centered art education orientation has reified con-ventions such as freedom of expression and the notion of experimentation, thereby creating a chasm between theory and practice, responsibility, and action. The notion of the child experimenting in art is so obscure, so wide and inclusive as to render the term ambiguous and vague in the workplace. 161 When left on their own to determine how art education orientations are to be trans-formed into classroom practice, teachers did not seem to be prepared with the knowledge, experience, time, and energy it takes to accomplish the task of transforming a general framework of aims, rationales, concepts, and skills into a program of art activities compat-ible with the school organization. The unremitting requirement of teachers to manage art with respect to the organizational structure of the school day stands to challenge and coerce any expectation for the implementation of goals associated with art education orientations. Perhaps, in our quest to improve art education standards and to understand the persistent sense of disjuncture, we have been misguided in our perception of what is at issue in this dilemma. A case in point is the Penn State Seminar of 1965 and its effort to generate an in-terest in curriculum programming focused on discipline-based art education. The resulting curricula were thought to have failed in the context of the classroom because teachers were unable or unwilling to make the adjustive effort required to accomplish what the goals en-dorsed. A recent resurgence of interest in this orientation to art by the Getty Center for Education in the Visual Arts (Lovano-Kerr, 1985) in the United States has been undertaken with a view to focusing on the "development and clarification of theory rather than a pro-gram of instruction" (Rush, 1984, p. 204). What is troublesome about this recent undertak-ing is the implied polarity it perpetuates between theory and practice at a time when art education is still recovering from strong criticism of earlier attempts at designing curricula that disregard the school as a workplace. As a top-to-bottom model informing teaching practice, the Getty model implies that what transpires in the classroom as art can be dealt with at a theoretical level without consideration of how teachers handle the day-to-day pro-cess of schooling itself. No matter how urgent is the need to establish art education as a se-rious discipline similar to other school subjects, one must not lose sight of the requirement for a program that is responsible to the members of the field in which it is intended for use. As it stands, and the findings of the present study appear to bear this out, a general framework of aims, rationales, concepts, and skills associated with the above orientations would seem to do little more than establish the parameters of what is to be developed, 162 without taking into account how they will be developed. The present study points out what appears to be the dysfunctional nature of a way of thinking that assumes that the parts in a junction (art education and school management) can be forged into a meaningful whole independently of each other and the context in which they are intended to be used. In general terms, the present predicament for art education represents the peculiarities of two systematized knowledge bases (art education and school management) as two differ-ent ways of viewing the world that have historically grown independently of one another. Although the roles associated with each structure continue to serve the common good of education, each has its own version determined by the peculiarities of its way of viewing the world. In the systematization of these discrete knowledge bases, the connection that has to be negotiated between them by the classroom teacher in achieving the totality of everyday experience in the classroom has been ignored. Advocates of these ways of structuring knowing appear to have forgotten the place of each structure in everyday life wherein a place has to be negotiated for it by the teacher. Members of the education community—art educators, education administrators, and curriculum designers—have paid little attention to the dilemma of the teacher left to negotiate a total orientation in the presence of a com-plexity of structural features. Art education orientations and organization and management ideals as autonomous domains have been able to camouflage a dependency on commonsense knowledge as the practice required to bring respective structures into place in the everyday life of the school. It is an oversimplification of the situation to say that school art is the "cause" of disjuncture. School art is merely symptomatic of the predicament of academic and institutional realities that have forgotten the practical work that has to go on to negoti-ate a place for them in the pedagogical experience. We seem to have ignored the practical reasoning (commonsense knowledge) that must go on in negotiating a fit between theory and practice. While each knowledge base individually makes manifest a familiar pattern of thought and action, the interaction of the two as the present study reveals constitutes a case wherein one (organization and management) has been allowed to dominate the other (art education) 163 in a non-discriminate manner. Notions of Art as a school subject have become only hypothetically relevant; that is, relevant provided certain other conditions are met. Art, it seems, has become buried under other elements it has come to serve. With the dominance of conceptions of organization and management, the art education experience has become for children and teachers an unquestioned and taken-for-granted routine. Teachers have become selectively inattentive to any features relevant to art education that do not fit the dominant patterns that pervade the school day. Implicit in this historically precedented way of portraying the art-pedagogical experience there persists the duality of theory and practice. That is, the fragmentation of the pedagogical experience into specialized knowledge bases has led to a situation wherein individual structures do not take into account the nature of the work that has to be done between parts in order to achieve a desirable whole. How a teacher is to negotiate a fit is left open to chance. What is needed is a way of approaching academic and organization and management structures in order to make them intelligible to each other and the everyday life of the classroom. An approach is needed that would bridge the gap in a manner that recognizes art education orientations (theory) and what teachers do with them (practice) as aspects of the same thing. Werner and Aoki (1979) use a circle metaphor to describe curriculum programming as intents, activities, and resources wherein goals to be achieved (intents) and the means of achieving them (activities and resources) are in a dialectic relationship: If intents are the "why" of a program, the activities are the "how." They are what teachers, students, and other participants are supposed to be doing in order to achieve intended outcomes. These activities are commonly referred to as teaching methodology, learning strategy and classroom organization designed to bring about the planned goals. Resource materials, on the other hand, con-stitute any "chunk of the world" which has been selected for program partici-pants to interact with. (p. 7) Such an approach would provide an arena in which the members of the education community could enter cooperatively into reflective interaction with the goal of bringing structures of conventional wisdom and practical knowledge-in-use into relationship. The significance of the present theoretical stance taken in this study is that it suspends prejudgment of the nature of the art teaching task in favor of an opportunity to 164 interact with teachers about the guidelines or knowledge they use and the operational sense that such guidelines take on in actual practice. In doing this, knowledge-in-use becomes of epistemological importance in understanding how to bridge the gap between theory and practice. The notion of the orientation of the good teacher of art examined in this study presupposes that the teacher is a competent member of the school setting, acting in good faith and guided by a set of practices tried and tested over time. This study has permitted a glimpse of the character of the good teacher's grasp of how art is guided by the require-ments of the school's operation. The study is significant in that it challenges simple portrayals of the task of teaching as linear and one-dimensional. It challenges, as well, easy prescriptions for making the teacher's task more effective. The stance taken goes beyond the disclosure of details describing features such as the pacing and phasing of art and the phys-ical appearance of the setting to disclose how teachers' commonsense choices of what to do are influenced by a number of elements that compete for attention as a teacher determines what is acceptable action. The findings illuminate the importance of understanding the role of a teacher's experience of commonsense knowledge of practical circumstances which bear upon how academic and organizational structures are brought into relationship. Herein lies a way of integrating theory and practice by encouraging an epistemological approach that is more concerned about the teacher's everyday reality than the pursuit of a scholarly work unreflective of the interests it is intended to serve. An environment of coop-erative interaction and action would enable teachers and others to surface dilemmas and subject them to study in a spirit of reflective action. In summary, in order to accomplish the expressed goals of art education and to overcome what constitutes a conventional, and possibly an indiscriminate, practice in the elementary school, we should give more attention to empirically-based analyses of disjuncture disclosed in the spirit of an approach that recognizes the importance of teachers' commonsense knowledge in negotiating what goes on in the classroom. We need an approach to art education that will no longer artificially produce the gap that structured art activities have come to f i l l . Such an approach would recognize art education orientations (theory) and 165 what teachers do with them (practice) as aspects of the same thing. Recommendations The present study discloses that there are several authoritative agencies and associa-tions who recognize the importance of the school subject Art in the elementary school cur-riculum. For example, the Program of Studies: Curriculum, Alberta Education (1982) asserts that children have a right to a full education in the school subject Art . As well, art educa-tors responsible for teacher education strongly advocate that elementary school generalist teachers receive adequate training in art education to ensure that what goes on in the class-room as art be commensurate with what art education regards as relevant. However, the findings of the present study disclose that the in-school orientation of curriculum and in-structional practice to a conventionalized form of doing art for reasons of efficiency and effectiveness in organizational routine has resulted in a reduction of opportunities for chil-dren to interact with the developed structure of the art education discipline and neglect of teachers' responsibility to ensure that such an opportunity take place. Further to this, the research findings reported in the present study concur with the work of Brophy (1982), Emmer, Evertson, and Anderson (1980), Johnson and Brooks (1979), and Yinger (1980) that factors in the school setting strongly influence the outcome of instructional practice. They are also in agreement with the findings of Cornbleth (1984), Doyle (1984), and McKay (1971) who contend that a teacher's way of making sense of a classroom situation can either support or contradict the manifest curriculum depending upon perceived circum-stances. It would seem to follow, then, that if it is important for children to interact with the developed structure of the art discipline, and if teachers are to take responsibility in en-suring that the art education experience takes place, then change should be urged in several ways. Art educators involved in teacher training should be informed of empirically-based analyses of disjuncture such as those reported in the present study. Awareness of the nature of dis juncture could lead to a constructively critical awareness of the practical circumstances 166 of the classroom teacher as a consequence of what has become an unquestioned and taken-for-granted way of life in the context of the school as an organizational structure. Aware-ness of the peculiarities of two systematized knowledge bases (art education and school or-ganization and management) and the ongoing task of the teacher in achieving a practical relationship between the two would help art educators reconceptualize the validity of the re-lationship between the principles they advocate and the practices they prepare their trainees to confront professionally. Teachers should be informed of the serious consequences perpetuated by the state of disjuncture in the field and the importance of using their wisdom to communicate and en-lighten themselves and others about the specific ways in which the school setting supports and contradicts the developed structure of art education. Teachers might find ways of using their collective wisdom and experience to arrive at a reconciliation of the differences be-tween the developed structure of art education and the situationally defined circumstances of the school. Curriculum developers should become cognizant of the nature of disjuncture as re-vealed in the present study, so that a more dynamic relationship might be invoked between what is proposed for curriculum adoption and the reality of the adopters of such proposals. The mechanisms by means of which curricula are produced, reproduced, and transformed would begin to occur within a wider social context enabling those concerned to confront more deliberately and reflectively the dynamic interactions that teachers experience daily. A more reciprocal relationship would be established between theory and practice so that the curriculum documents that result would represent a model of mutual and coherent interac-tion suggestive of a commonsense approach. Educational administrative agents who oversee the organization and management of schooling should be informed of the nature of the present state of disjuncture as it has been made evident in the findings of the present study, and how factors associated with it have come to complement and contradict the interfacing of what ought to be with what is the case in the classroom. 167 In apprising others of the consequences of the present state of disjuncture, attention should be drawn to other school subjects. What is the in-school orientation of the good teacher of language arts, music, movement, science? An accumulative data base would pro-vide a more comprehensive understanding of the similarities and differences in orientation across subject areas and what inherent features complement and contradict the process of schooling. The findings suggest as well the need to look at the organizational structure: timetabling, pacing and phasing, physical resources, and evaluation methods with a focus on the commonsense knowledge of other members of the setting (children, parents, school per-sonnel) and the practical considerations they confront that bear on what is done as art and how it is accomplished. As well, one might look at teacher education institutions and ask how pedagogical issues of the organizational structure of the school day are presently ad-dressed. Finally, teachers and art educators must want to conceptualize art education orientations and the workplace in ways that make them more congruent with each other. The implication is that teachers and educators must work together, be sensitive to the situa-tional factors in the organizational structure of the school, and come to appreciate a shared responsibility for the education experience. Shared responsibility suggests that attempts to change art curricula or the structure of the school need to be done from the perspective of what is known about both the school environment and the ideals of art education. Proposed change must begin to reflect the demands of implementation in the school. Acknowledgment of the necessity for a shared knowledge of the task would evolve into sustained dialogue over time. The present study, in offering insight into factors associated with a state of disjuncture, provides a basis for a constructive interchange of ideas. 168 REFERENCES Alberta Education. (1982). Program of studies: Curriculum. Edmonton: Author. Barzun, J. (1978). Art and educational inflation. Art Education, 31(6), 4-10. Becher, T., & Maclure, S. (1978). The politics of curriculum change. London: Hutchinson. Bersson, E . (1986). Why art education lacks social relevance: A contextual analysis. Art Education, 39(4), 41-45. Brophy, J .E. (1982). How teachers influence what is taught and learned in classrooms. Elementary School Journal, 83(1), 2-13. Bullough, R . V . , & Goldstein, S.L. (1984). Technical curriculum form and American ele-mentary school art education. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 16(2), 143-154. Chalmers, G . (1979). Art in society: Implications for the curriculum. In J . Cunningham, D . C . Wilson, & D . Boughton (Eds.), Curriculum policies and the expressive arts (pp. 1-8). Centre for the Study of Curriculum and Instruction, University of British Columbia. Chapman, L . (1979a). The bearing of artistic and educational commitments on the teaching of art. In G . L . Knieter & J . Stallings (Eds.), The teaching process and arts and aes-thetics (pp. 193-215). Missouri: C E M R E L . Chapman, L . (1979b). Research means searching again. Art Education, 32(4), 6-10. Chapman, L . (1982). Instant art, instant culture: The unspoken policy for American schools. Teachers' College, Columbia University. Chapman, L . (1985). Curriculum development as process and product. Studies in Art Educa-tion, 26(4), 206-211. Cicourel, A . V . (1973). Cognitive sociology. London: Penguin. Clark, G . A . (1984). Beyond the Penn State Seminar: A critique of curricula. Studies in Art Education, 25(4), 226-231. Clark, G . A . (1986). We need all the help we can get. Art Education, 39(2), 4-44. Cornbleth, C. (1984). Beyond hidden curriculum. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 16(1), 29-36. Day, M . (1979). Child art, school art, and the real world of art. In S .M. Dobbs (Ed.), Arts education and back to basics (pp. 113-128). Reston, V A : National Art Education As-sociation. 169 De Francesco, I. (1958). Art education: Its means and ends. New York: Harper. Degge, R . L . (1979). What do teachers need to make art basic? In S .M. Dobbs (Ed.), Arts education and back to basics (pp. 169-180). Reston, V A : National Art Education As-sociation. Department of Education, Province of Alberta. (1964). Art curriculum guide. Edmonton. Detmers, W.R. (1980). A conceptual model for curriculum planning and evaluation in the visual arts. Studies in Art Education, 21(2), 57-65. Dorn, C M . (1976). Professional values, ambiguities and ambivalence. Art Education, 29(2), 5-7. Dorn, C M . (Ed.) . (1977) Report of the National Art Education Association Commission on Art Education. Reston, V A : The National Art Education Association. Dorn, C M . (1984). Separate but not equal: The unfulfilled promise of art curriculum. Art Education, 34(6), 28-35. Douglas, J .D. (Ed.) . (1970). Understanding everyday life. In Understanding everyday life: Toward the reconstruction of sociological knowledge (pp. 3-44). Chicago: Aldine. Doyle, W. (1979). Making managerial decisions in classrooms. In D . L . Duke (Ed.), Class-room management (pp. 42-74). University of Chicago Press. Doyle, W. (1982). Research on classroom contexts. Journal of Teacher Education, 32(6), 3-6. Doyle, W. (1984). How order is achieved in classrooms. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 6(3), 259-277. Doyle, W. (1985). Recent research on classroom management: Implications for teacher preparation. Journal of Teacher Education, 36(2), 31-35. Efland, A . D . (1976). The school art style: A functional analysis. Studies in Art Education, 17(2), 37-45. Efland, A . D . (1979). Conceptions of teaching in art education. Art Education, 32(4), 21-33. Efland, A . D . (1984). Curriculum concepts of the Penn State Seminar: An evaluation in ret-rospect. Studies in Art Education, 25(4), 205-211. Efland, A . D . (1985). Changing conceptions of human development and its role in teaching the visual arts. Visual Arts Education, 11(1), 105-119. Eisner, E . W . (1973). Research on teaching the visual arts. In R . M . Travers (Ed.), Second handbook of research on teaching. Chicago: Rand McNally. Eisner, E . W . (1978). Humanistic trends and the curriculum field. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 10(3), 197-204. Eisner, E . W . (1979). Artistic thinking, human intelligence and the mission of the school. In J . Cunningham, D . C . Wilson, & D . Boughton (Eds.), Curriculum policies and the ex-pressive arts (pp. 29-41). Centre for the Study of Curriculum and Instruction, Uni -versity of British Columbia. 170 Eisner, E .W. (1982). The relationship of theory and practice in art education. Art Educa-tion, 35(1), 4-5. Eisner E . W . (1984). Alternative approaches to curriculum development in art education. Studies in Art Education, 25(4), 259-264. Emmer, E .T. , Evertson, C M . , & Anderson, L . M . (1980). Effective classroom management at the beginning of the school year. Elementary School Journal, 80(5), 219-231. Feldman, E . B . (1980). Some lessons from art history for art educational research. The Journal of Aesthetic Education, 14(3), 81-91. Field Services. The handbook for practicum programs in the elementary schools 1985-86. Edmonton: Faculty of Education, University of Alberta. Gaitskell, C D . , & Ffurwitz, A . (1970). Children and their art. New York: Harcourt, Brace & World. Garfinkel, H . (1963). A conception of, and experiments with, 'trust' as a condition of stable concerted actions. In O.J. Harvey (Ed.), Motivation and social interaction: Cognitive determinants (pp. 187-238). New York: Ronald Press. Garfinkel, H . (1967). Studies in ethnomethodology. Englewood Cliffs, N J : Prentice Hall . Garfinkel, H . , & Sacks, H . (1970). On formal structures of practical actions. In J.C. McKinney & E . A . Tiryakian (Eds.), Theoretical sociology: Perspectives and de-velopments (pp. 337-366). New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts. Geahighan, G . (1976). Curriculum projects and criticism: The need for conceptual analysis. Studies in Art Education, 18(1), 7-16. Greer, W . D . (1984). A discipline-based view of art education. Studies in Art Education, 25(4), 212-218. Gurwitsch, A . (1966). Studies in phenomenology and psychology. Evanston: Northwestern University Press. Husserl, E . (1975). Ideas: General introduction to pure phenomenology (W.R. Boyce Gibson, Trans.). New York: Collier Macmillan. Jagodzinski, J . , & Palmer, M . (1984). Reflections on the new elementary art curriculum for Alberta. Art Education, 36(5), 9-11. Johnson, M . , & Brooks, H . (1979). Conceptualizing classroom management. In D . L . Duke (Ed.), Classroom management (pp. 1-41). University of Chicago Press. Kern, E . J . (1984). The aesthetic education curriculum reform. Studies in Art Education, 25(4), 219-225. LaChappelle, J . (1982). Conflict between research and practice in art education: A sociolog-ical perspective. Studies in Art Education, 23(2), 56-63. Lanier, V . (1980). Six items on the agenda for the eighties. Art Education, 33(5), 16-23. Lanier, V . (1984). Eight guidelines for selecting art curriculum content. Studies in Art Edu-cation, 25(4), 232-237. 171 Leiter, K . (1980). A primer on ethnomethodology. New York: Oxford University Press. Leiter, K . (1971). Telling it like it is: A study of teachers' accounts. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of California, Santa Barbara. Lovano-Kerr, J . (1985). Implications of D B A E for university education. Studies in Art Edu-cation, 26(4), 216-223. Lowenfeld, V . , & Brittain, W . L . (1982). Creative and mental growth (7th ed.). New York: Macmillan. Macklin, A . D . (1978). Selling the art program: Tickling a sacred cow. Art Education, 31(H), 10-13. Madeja, S.S. (1980). The art curriculum: Sins of omission. Art Education, 33(6), 24-26. Mannheim, K . (1952). Essays on the sociology of knowledge. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. McKay, R . W . (1971). The ethnography of the classroom: Knowledge as the ethnography of consciousness. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of California, Santa Barbara. Mittler G . A . (1976). Structuring instruction in art fundamentals for the elementary school. Art Education, 29(6), 13-17. Nadaner, D . (1983). Building theory and practice interactions in art teacher education. Visual Arts Research, 9(1), 64-69. Natanson, M . (1962). Literature, philosophy, and the social sciences. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff. Natanson, M . (1973). Phenomenology and the social sciences. In M . Natanson (Ed.), Phe-nomenology and the social sciences (Vol. 1, pp. 3-44). Evanston: Northwestern Uni -versity Press. Reimer, B . (1979). Difficulties in studying how values affect teachers' actions. In G . L . Knieter & J . Stallings (Eds.), The teaching process and arts and aesthetics (pp. 217-222). Missouri: C E M R E L . Rush, J . (1984). Editorial: Who decides? Studies in Art Education, 25(4), 203-204. Rush, J . , & Conant, H . (1979). Excellence: The key to educating visual artists. Art Educa-tion, 52(8), 8-16. Sharp, R. , & Green, A . (1975). Education and social control: A study in progressive primary education. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. Schutz, A . (1962). Collected papers I: The problem of social reality ( M . Natanson, Trans.). The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff. Schutz, (1964). Collected papers II: Studies in social theory (A. Brodersen, Trans.). The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff. Schutz, A . (1966). Collected papers III: Studies in phenomenological philosophy (Use Schutz, Ed. ) . The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff. 172 Schutz, A . (1970). Reflections on the problems of relevance ( R . M . Zaner, Trans). London: Yale University Press. Schutz, A . (1978). Some structures of the life-world. In T. Luckmann (Ed.), Phenomenolo-gy and sociology (pp. 257-274). New York: Penguin. Schutz, A . , & Luckmann, T. (1973). The structures of the life-world. Evanston, Northwest-ern University Press. Shulman, L .S . (1979). Research on teaching in the arts: Review, analysis, critique. In G . L . Knieter & J . Stallings (Eds.), The teaching process and arts and aesthetics (pp. 244-263). Missouri: C E M R E L . Smith, D . (1973). The social construction of documentary reality. Sociological Inquiry, 44(A), 257-268. Smith, R . A . (1980). The "deschooling" of art education: How it's happening and what to do about it. Art Education, 33(3), 8-10. Spradley, J.P. (1980). Participant observation. Toronto: Holt, Rinehart & Winston. Stoddart, K . (1986). Some received criteria of ethnographic adequacy. Urban Life, 15(1), 103-121. A survey of Provincial curricula at the elementary and secondary levels. (1983). Canada: Council of Ministers of Education. Tyler, R. (1949). Basic principles of curriculum and instruction. University of Chicago Press. Werner, W. , & Aoki, T. (1979). Programs for people: Introducing program development im-plementation and evaluation. Centre for the Study of Curriculum and Instruction, Uni -versity of British Columbia. Wieder, C . G . (1975). Alternative approaches to problems in art education. Studies in Art Education, 17(1), 17-24. Wilson, B . (1971). Evaluation of student learning. In B.S. Bloom, I.J. Hastings, & G . F . Madaus (Eds.), Handbook on formative and summative evaluation of student learning (pp. 449-558). New York: McGraw Hi l l . Wilson, B . , & Wilson, M . (1977). An iconoclastic view of the imagery sources in the draw-ings of young people. Art Education, 30(1), 5-11. Wilson, B . , & Wilson, M . (1979). Figure structure, figure action, and framing in drawings by American and Egyptian children. Studies in Art Education, 21(1), 36-43. Wilson, T.P. (1970). Conceptions of interaction and forms of sociological explanation. American Sociological Review, 3(4), 697-709. Yinger, R . J . (1980). A study of teacher planning. Elementary School Journal, 80(3), 107-127. Zaner, R . M . (Ed.) . (1970). Introduction. In A . Schutz, Reflections on the problem of rele-vance. New Haven & London: Yale University Press. Zimmerman & Pollner. (1970). The everyday world as a phenomenon. In J . Douglas (Ed Understanding everyday life: Toward the reconstruction of sociological knowledge (pp. 80-103). Chicago: Aldine. 174 APPENDIX A Excerpt from the Original Transcript of Teacher A P A T : It's April 25 and I am going to visit Teacher A this afternoon at 1:05. She is doing painting with her grade one art class. T E A C H E R A : Girls and boys, today you will be painting a pattern you have made. Now remember we are limited to the five colors and to my dismay when I went to mix them, I realized I was two short, so I will have to go upstairs and get two more col-ors for us but you have lots to do while I am doing that. Now, because of the size of the paper I have had to spread you out so you will be putting a newspaper, where did I put my newspapers . . . Take the newspaper, just a single but open it right out, you know how I have asked you to do that with us? Somebody is not listening. Could you sit properly Miss Alice please, as properly as you can. Alright I would like you today to open it up. Now that means that it is going to take a lot of room and that is why you have to spread your desks out. You will have to watch that you don't hit the edges and knock paint flying and that is why I have spread you out this way. You shouldn't be rubbing against someone's painting. Now one of the most dangerous is Miss Jennifer right here, but I hope that when you are moving past her you will be very careful that you don't bump her painting off. I am trusting you to do that. I will be moving that desk a bit so you can walk right around the table so you can go to both sides to get your paint. Now here is the first thing I want you to do. Another girl not listening. I thought that little lady wanted to paint today. You are not listening if you are reading a book. Have you got it away? Hurry please. Now please be careful that you don't knock someone's off. While I go upstairs to get the rest of the paint I am going to be asking you to do two things, three things I guess alto-gether. I l l have Miss Rafferty do one. I'll have you put your shirt on, then get your paper, I have set them down there on the floor, you 11 have to watch those girls desks while you take your piece of paper; I think you had better spread your paper out first, then put your paint shirt on and then when you have got those two things done 175 go to Miss Rafferty and she will, if I am not back, she will give you your painting. If I am back then you can get in your seats with your heads down because I don't think she knows all your names yet. Okay, so don't make a noise now while I am gone. If you don't know what to do just go to your desks and put your heads down. Do you mind if I leave them with you for that short time? Betty you can use an extra shirt after the others have got theirs. P A T : How did you make that? S T U D E N T : I don't know. P A T : Could you tell me how you got this? S T U D E N T : I don't know. P A T : Did you do it? S T U D E N T : Yes. P A T : How did you do it? S T U D E N T : We made it by the shapes. P A T : It's shapes, is it? And how did you do it? S T U D E N T : I got a pencil and I traced it. P A T : You traced it? From what? S T U D E N T : From those things over there. P A T : From the shapes over there? What are the shapes? S T U D E N T : Stars, circles, triangles, squares, ovals. We are going to paint for the Spring concert. P A T : Can you tell me something else you are going to do? S T U D E N T : We are going to hang them up on the wall in the gym and people are going to see it and they are going to sing and all that, and me and my brother are going to be doing a dance, a tap dance. Teacher A returns to the classroom. T E A C H E R A : David, Trevor, Laney, Shannon, Jamie, Brian, Becky (the rest is quite in-audible) I am looking for good helpers. And I don't hear any good helpers. People 176 that are noisy never make good helpers. I hear noise yet. I can't pick a quiet one that way. Wel l pick the quietest. I like to get them to do as much . . . hey. Looks like a different room. In the room upstairs just off the stairway I would like the tangerine if we can get it. Now then I am going to need a good stirrer for the blue. Let's try you please, this one is so quiet sitting between Lisa and Angela and never looked up. You were so good and when I looked at you you didn't even move. Go around that side and watch that tape recorder. Don't knock it off, and I would say that you cer-tainly sat very quiet Shannon. Now Shannon would like to stir the yellow. You better come down here Shannon so that we don't get it on that tape recorder. Come and stir this please Trevor. Just so many good people, and stir this red please, but mind you there are lots of good ones, oh let's get two good people cleaning up the papers in these piles. (At this point there is a lot of noise and no conversation.) The rest of you may take your seats now, thank you very much Andy, he can listen while he works, okay Andy? Okay, watch that tape recorder, in your desks. Now remember boys and girls, oh somebody isn't ready. Can't talk unless we are listening. The colors you can use are black, yellow, green, red, blue only. Now the other day with your finger painting you were mixing colors. Today I don't want them mixed because you know if you mix red and yellow what are you going to get? Red and yellow? Orange. What if you mix the red with the blue? It should make, Angela? Purple. And of course if you mix yellow and blue you are going to get? What? Yes Lynn. Green. Now if I said I don't want you to mix it up because these colors are not that pure and when you mix them you don't get a pure color as you found out with your fin-ger painting but you do get a shade of it, so today I want you to just use these col-ors keeping them separate on your pattern. Now here are some suggestions; as I told you the other day you have to use five colors. No; use some of your colors to color the small ones and you know what you want right now. You know what you like. If you want to use two colors, okay by me. If you want to use three colors, that's fine. Four colors is even okay. If you want to use all five you may use all five. Now you 177 may want to color your figures with four colors and leave the fifth color for the background because there can't be any white on it. So you might want to use four colors and that still leaves the five for the background, but that is up to you. Now let me review this painting procedure because Betty Lou and I am not sure that Shannon has been here for painting either. Girls and boys you walk to the table. I am going to move the desk that Miss Rafferty is in after, don't move yet. You walk and you can use both sides of the table. I will be putting paint in these two so you will have two in red, two in black, two in blue so you won't have to reach so far. Re-member you take your brush, you pick it up and what do you do with it Jennie Nagle? Rub it on the side, a little bit off so it doesn't drip. Then you walk to your desk, you paint, when it is dry you come back and do it again. If you change colors what do you do David? If there is already a brush in the color you want and nobody is using it what would you do? You would use it first, right. But if there is no brush the color you want then you would pick up a new brush. So I have got the brushes handy, I'll fix the paints handy and we'll be starting in a few minutes. While you are getting ready to start please think about the color you want to do so you know what you are doing. Let's not have somebody saying, Oh gee! I didn't intend to do that. Now I have done it. Oh, this is lighter than the others. Watch you don't tip this when you are wiping your brush on it you may find that you would like to take your other hand and hold it. I think it will set but it is lighter than the others. Those are the two yellows. I have got one yellow way over here and one yellow there. Maybe a smart idea would be to just paint a little bit of the rim so you won't have to look in; youH see its yellow, okay. The black is here. I am spreading them out you will notice so that they are not too close together. You can tell that is a red sure. Another red here maybe and we have the blues. That should be good now. Let's save the big brushes for the tall jars. Now once more remember no foolishness, in fact no talking. Finished product you will have to maybe hand to us to move under the shelf. Leave Miss Rafferty alone so she can talk to different ones. You come to me with your 178 problems more than to her. Any questions? I think when you come to use it you can just one up. The only reason that I have put the two in here is that they are two tall brushes. It is hard with these jars to make this reach but you can. We don't want it on the floor, we want to make sure it has quit dripping. We don't want it on anybody's clothes, we watch what we are doing. Let us start with row, oh, I'll have you stand so I can move this if you don't mind. Oh, we have got talkers, and talkers are no good for paint time. Okay, row three would you like to start? Alright row two. Row one please. Row four please. Row five please. No talking. Try not to stand and reach from the back of your desk. Reach from this side. Non talkers hardly ever spill their paint. I like the way that you are watching where your friends are so you are not bumping into any of them as you are walking back and forth. P A T : Can I ask you what they did the other day to get started? T E A C H E R A : The idea came from the one that is directing the concert. I'll show you what she has done. Painters don't talk, they just think about their painting. This was the way that it was worded to us. Now they are asking if we would do something for the education week so it is presented pretty well like that and ours of course is the deco-rations for the gym; and then she suggested grade one to paint a design and when she spoke to us she mentioned using geometric shapes as much as possible. So these didn't show that but I did say we will set out these geometric shapes and you plan a pic-ture. Now I will show you the ones, they are not all here. They had both sides of the paper and they just experimented on how to do it and what they would like and then I made bigger patterns and let them go ahead with their big sheets so they did have a drawing. You see this one? He was lining up what he would do when he was finished. I thought this was interesting where he put a square in the middle. It will be interest-ing to see how they finish today to see how close they came to what they had planned, like that was kind of interesting. Now I don't know, well see what she; she is wearing the green and brown shirt, she is going to put one in here. But you see she hasn't by the look of it done this type of thing. But that was an interesting one; I 179 wish she would have done that for her big one. P A T : So they did them on a small scale and then they could take that idea . . . T E A C H E R A : . . . and put it to paint but they didn't have to. If they wanted to copy. There is Andy's idea; you see he has changed his quite a bit but that is alright. They could copy this or they could go to another type but that was how it all came about for starters. It will be interesting to see how many did come close but some did paint them Friday. P A T : Was it someone in the school that organized this? T E A C H E R A : Yes. Grade two is at the head of coordinating the concert so she gave us this suggestion. We didn't have to do it but that was her suggestion. The five colors to do with Universiade. P A T : It was her idea to involve the children in art? T E A C H E R A : Yes. You see what we do here is about the half the school go in the Christ-mas concert and the other half go in this concert while children like this group that went in the Christmas concert will now have a chance to participate in this concert but with art because we decorate our gym and this being Universiade we are kind of put on as extra. Usually the art work that we have done in the school like our finger painting and whatever we have been doing and decorate the gym, but this year we are doing a special project for it. PAT: And all the children get to participate? T E A C H E R A : Yes. We try to so that everybody has some part in it, and some decorate the programs too. I wrote out another little bit for you from the . . . this was the finger painting, first lesson and what we did, second lesson and the purposes and this is the banner for the Universiade. That is what we did, the purpose of the banner, the col-ors. We talked about that, we talked about the games. The games now are tying in with their expressways reading and then we did that, we also went over and over the design that I used in arithmetic so were naming the designs but made them all squares just to be one shape but different sizes while a triangle can be many shapes so I had 180 a lesson on that with arithemetic and then we did on small paper and now we are trying the big paper. P A T : Now I see that these are banners to decorate. T E A C H E R A : She didn't call ours banners which rather puzzled me because you notice today I nearly said banners but I thought I had better say design. She called the other grades' banners so I couldn't quite understand how ours were different but this was the size she wanted so I would kind of call it a banner. Maybe the others are going to be hung on a thing suspended while these are going to be flat on the wall. Maybe that is what her thoughts are, I don't know. Because I am sure in that there is a class doing banners P A T : The children; I didn't hear them calling them banners yet. T E A C H E R A : I stayed away from it because of something that I read or heard or felt that maybe I had better watch it, see; grade two painted banners hung vertically, the size is different though; theirs is bigger but she called these painted designs, I didn't know so I thought I had better stick to . . . now maybe that, she did say to us grade one teachers geometric or designs on it like squares and that, so I sort of kept that, I don't think anybody did that. Of course they had access to the geometric shapes but it will be interesting to see what (conversation inaudible due to student noise in the background) but they have done quite an interesting job of it I think, just their designs. I am wondering though, Pat, if after we have got the painting if we would be wise to take the black, I am not sure I hate doing the work, that is the worst of it, I'd rather it be something that they can do, like give them a black pen to go around their figures so that they would show up better or I could let them paint it black with a brush but I thought I'd better wait and see first because sometimes you just spoil a grade one by doing that. So I don't know what, you can see when we have finished. P A T : See what they come up with. I don't mean to be apprehensive but it is just that, like you said, you start with small ones and you notice that they have changed their 181 mind. T E A C H E R A : Yes, quite a bit, most of them have changed their mind I think that you will find that most of them have but it will be interesting to see. P A T : Do they usually do that, do you find that sort of with the grade ones that . . . ? T E A C H E R A : They are interested in being creative and that each thing is a new thing. To have them make a small one even in stories you get them to write a small one, or a story to plan it and then when they come to do another they often will change their topic of thinking and they don't. 182 APPENDIX B Excerpt from the Original Transcript of Teacher G P A T : Today is June 8th. Teacher G is doing collage with her grade five class. The theme is animals and she has asked them to bring scraps of fabric. T E A C H E R G : Okay, let's do the usual and check down the list of supplies you were supposed to bring. Who doesn't have cardboard? Nine people. I've got some but I don't think I have enough. One, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine. Okay. Take time and see if you can get your materials. I'm just going to write down the names of these guys who always forget. P A T : Is it the same guys all the time? T E A C H E R G : Y a , all the way through the year. Dwayne, sit down as soon as you can, please. This is the last Art project of the year. Next day is our trackmeet. What I wanted to tell you is the basic steps. You are making what is called Scrap Art Ani-mals today. This is one I made last night. It's a rabbit. You don't have to make a rabbit. What you can do is, first of all, pick out an animal. On the example sheet that I was looking at they did a rabbit, a dog, and a cat. The thing to do is have in your head the basic shape of the animal and don't be afraid to make him big so certain points stand out. I think you should be careful. I don't know of any animal that is going to be super hard for you to do. I think everything is possible. If you've got a really tiny piece of cardboard like Nathan has, I suggest you trade it for one of mine. You need a big one about this size. A l l right, does anybody have any questions? No? You can start at the bottom of the animal, the top, or whatever. With mine, last night, I started with the face, then I put his ears on. The last thing I did was his feet. The only thing I needed was to draw in the eyeballs. If you want you can just cut out tiny circles. Take time, if you have anything left over, well put it on the small table in the center, and that's where you can get something extra. Anybody stuck for ideas? Everyone has got an animal in mind? Yes, it has to be an animal. Away you go. 183 Teacher G and I discuss how the class is progressing. T E A C H E R G : Like Edward, I don't know what he's doing on his picture there in the sec-ond row. No, third row. I told him that he wasn't supposed to do a monster but he is still doing it. He has just ignored what I said. If I was marking that I'd fail him on it. I'd say the worst failure today was that half these guys didn't have school supplies. It wasn't even Art supplies. They didn't have their own school supplies. PAT: And you told them? T E A C H E R G : Oh ya. Whenever we need stuff nobody has it. Let me see. How are you doing on it? P A T : The little boy in the front row, the other day he wasn't really concentrating that much on what he was doing but today he is. Child approaches the teacher's desk with his collage. B O Y : This is suppose to be a bat hanging onto a mountain. T E A C H E R G : It's supposed to be a what? B O Y : A bat hanging onto a mountain. T E A C H E R G : A cat hanging onto a mountain. I don't get it. You don't have a mountain shape here though, do you? B O Y : Right here. T E A C H E R G : Oh, that's the mountain. This is a cat then? B O Y : A bat. T E A C H E R G : Oh, a bat. You know, it looks just like an ordinary cat to me because of its ears. That's why I didn't understand. You know what you could do, too? What is this on the bat, his eyes? Maybe draw pupils or something or some kind of fang on. Then the mouth might go here. Maybe you could put a full moon up here. Fi l l up this page. It's good but I think it looks unfinished. That's good. A l l right, let me see. This is a turtle, right? That looks good. You know what you could do? Add more color to it. You know how turtles have shells on their backs? They sort of have half moon shapes on their backs. You could put something 184 in the background like a bit of nature to fill up the extra cardboard. It looks good, Tara. Check with Tara on what I just told her about the back of the turtle shell. It just adds another dimension to it. The head is really good. Same thing I said to Tara, if you want to you can put something in the background as far as a sun or some-thing. You don't have to. Maybe check with her because she's got some ideas. G I R L : Can I use your scissors? T E A C H E R G : No, I'm sorry because if I let you use mine then it doesn't cut paper after-wards. That's why I'm not letting anybody use them. P A T : I think they are doing really good work. T E A C H E R G : They usually do. It takes them five seconds to grasp the concept. P A T : Usually, I think, they are all using animals. T E A C H E R G : Yes, the only one I have problems with is Edward. He always has to do something different. P A T : Is that Edward standing up? T E A C H E R G : Yes, I have problems with him all the time. You can talk to him until you are blue in the face and he will still ignore you. He's really hard to teach. P A T : I noticed him wanting to do something different. T E A C H E R G : Most Art projects it doesn't matter. Today I didn't want him to do a mon-ster. I don't know what has gotten into him. What I was going to do is put your names on the cardboard and I'll show you where I want them put up, Mark. Oh dear, he's done a Father's Day card, my one idea. T E A C H E R G : What is this? B O Y : A dog. T E A C H E R G : I shouldn't have to guess. It should stand out. You need a tail, don't you? Even if it is out to the side somewhere? You might want to put claws on him. Put an inside to the ear if you wanted to. Try that and bring it back then we'll put your 185 name on it and get Mark to put it up. That sure looks better, but what I want you to do is use material to do that. That's okay, you can't erase it now. Just put your name on it, Tara. Did you make a Father's Day caTd yet? Al l right, that's a good thing to do. That would be something you could work towards. Mark has my stapler and he'll put it up outside there, okay? How come you have two kinds of eyes? B O Y : Cause. T E A C H E R G : Just to be different? B O Y : Y a . T E A C H E R G : Okay. P A T : Is that a teddy bear? Did you do a teddy bear the other day? Is there something else you were working on? G I R L : I don't know. I don't remember. P A T : On the big collage, somebody was doing teddy bears. T E A C H E R G : Oh ya, was that you? You and Wanda were, I think. You have got a lot of empty space here. You can fill that in with something. Put him in a forest or put him on a shelf in a girl's room with all the other toys. It wouldn't necessarily have to do with toys. Put him on a shelf, or on a bed, or in a rocking chair. G I R L : Okay. T E A C H E R G : Fi l l in some of the space, okay? P A T : It is hard to get around that isn't it? T E A C H E R G : Edward, are you done? Let's see, please. What is it? Oh, neat. Did you do this purposely? B O Y : No. T E A C H E R G : It is kind of neat like that. Okay, you are missing a face. No, no, put it in though, like eyes, ears, and mouth. See this one, how it has whiskers? They took the time and put some hair down the front of it, like long hair in the front there. Basic-ally, you've got the rest of it right. It's whatever you think of when you think of a cat. I think you should put a face on it. 186 P A T : It is so much more relaxing when it is a double period. T E A C H E R G : There's no way I'd try to do it like some of the other guys do in one period. P A T : So they just get started? T E A C H E R G : Ya , even the mess, if you did paper mache or something like that, you need that double period. You need a good fifteen minutes to clean up. That's way better. Are you done for sure? B O Y : Yep. T E A C H E R G : Al l right. This goes to Mark and he'll put it up outside. Then what you can do is make a Father's Day card or a card for an uncle, or grandpa, or something, all right? B O Y : Okay. T E A C H E R G : I can't remember if he has a father. P A T : The first day I met with you people, you were telling me something about the core subjects. I was looking over my notes and I couldn't figure out what it was. You and Teacher B , or someone and Teacher B, had mentioned it. They said the students don't take Art as seriously as they do the core subjects. Do you remember someone saying that? I can't remember if it was you. Title? Today Teacher G was doing the work on the collage with scraps of mate-rial. She asked the children to bring in pieces of fabric, lace, and scraps. There were, I think, five boys who didn't bring in anything. Teacher G is quite annoyed. She told me that was it and that she was going to take their names down because they'd been forgetting a lot of the materials, things that she'd been asking them to bring to class. With that she put their names down on a piece of paper and left it on the desk. Teacher G had given instructions on this projects. She did that by holding up to them a crap work that she had done the night before. She told them what she had done and it was of a rabbit. She told them that she wanted them to do an animal. She pointed out some of the features of the animal that she had made. With that a 187 few of the kids, well Edward was really the person, who really got this off. He said, "Can I do a monster?" She said, "Did you hear what I said earlier?" Edward said, "Ya , you said that you wanted us to do an animal." She said, "Well, there you go. You just have to think of an animal." There was one or two kids that said they couldn't think of an animal. Teacher G told them to use their imagination and it was dropped at that. Much later on she pointed out to me, "There's Edward again. He's fooling around. He finds it really hard to concentrate." She said that she has a lot of prob-lems getting him to follow instructions. She said, "You see, I told them that they had to do an animal. I'm not sure that Edward will come up with an animal. Often he doesn't do what I tell him to do." She said that she had put that on his report card, that he was having difficulty following directions. She also told me that she didn't mark them on their art work. She gave them some kind of one sentence indication about how they were doing in their art. Edward came up later on with his art work and she said, "I wonder what he's going to bring up." He brought up something that was sort of half animal and half human-like. It could go either way. She said to Edward, "What is it?" Teacher G had asked most of the children what it was that they had done. I really hope we are going to pick up some of her conversation with the chil-dren from that other tape. It's tape six because the comments are very, very good. In any case, she asked Edward what it was. I can't remember what the name of the ani-mal was. It wasn't just an ordinary dog or cat. It was something unusual. It might have even been some kind of mythical character. I can't remember right now what it was. In any case, she didn't say too much to Edward. As he was leaving to go back to his seat, she said to me, "I'm not really sure that it is an animal." When Teacher G was talking to the children, if I could point out, about their art, they'd come up with it after they thought they had finished or to get some com-ment on it from Teacher G . Most of them went back to their seats and did more 188 work on it. Generally, what she was saying to them was that they needed to fill in the background, that it wasn't finished. She'd ask them what various parts were. She seemed to like things that had a lot of material put on it. She said she didn't like the eyes being left without pupils on them. She was asking the kids to fill in the eyes with more material. There were some that she was really fond of, two or three of them. After Teacher G had made comments on, I'd say, the work of 90 percent of the children in the class, the children went back to their places. They were making changes on their art work. It was then that she told me about Edward and that she would place on his report that he was finding it very difficult to follow directions. It was also then that she told me that she didn't give the children a mark on their art. She felt that each teacher probably handled that in her own way. It was her own idea that each child shouldn't be given a mark and she didn't like to pass judgement on the children's art work. She put one or two comments on the record. An interesting thing that comes to mind, too, was the number of teachers that when they discussed the children with me, they were not discussing the child's art. They were talking about the child's behavior, attentiveness to what he is doing in the classroom, and the way the child socializes in the classroom. 189 APPENDIX C Recommended Allotted Times for School Subjects: The Province of Alberta Grades 1 and 2 Subject Percentage Minutes Language Arts 35% 525 Mathematics 13% 200 Science 5% 75 Social Studies 7% 100 Fine Arts (Art and Music) 10% 150 Health and Physical Education 10% 150 Undefined 20% 300 Grades 3 • 6 Inclusive Subject Percentage Minutes Language Arts 30% 450 Mathematics 13% 200 Science 7% 100 Social Studies 10% 150 Fine Arts (Art and Music) 10% 150 Health and Physical Education 10% 150 Undefined 20% 300 190 APPENDIX D School Organization and Operation The following chart indicates the average instructional time allocated by schools throughout one Public School District. Grade 1 2 3 4 5 6 Language Arts 645 620 610 610 610 610 Social Studies 225 230 230 230 230 230 Mathematics 210 240 240 240 240 240 Science 70 80 90 95 95 100 Music 70 75 75 70 70 65 Art 70 70 70 70 70 70 Health & Physical Education 135 145 145 145 145 145 TOTALS 1425 1460 1460 1460 1460 ' 1460 191 APPENDIX E Past Course Registrations F A C U L T Y : Education D E P A R T M E N T : Elementary REGISTRATION BY TERM 1976-77 1977-78 1978-79 1979-80 FIRST SECOND FIRST SECOND FIRST SECOND FIRST SECOND Ed CI 212 (Social Studies) 174 146 271 163 224 118 205 165 Ed CI 216 (Math) 165 155 270 128 297 235 150 163 Ed CI 220 (Science) 120 103 172 171 158 116 86 75 Ed CI 224 (Reading) 385 272 210 231 134 217 103 88 Ed CI 229 (Language) 235 169 244 231 181 186 186 127 Ed CI 236 (Art) 99 100 109 114 93 108 116 95 Ed CI 239 (Music) 131 105 93 132 90 113 77 106 APPENDIX F University of Alberta—Faculty of Education Practicum Progress Report Elementary Phase III Practicum Ifld-PoaM j—l Final Report L_l Report • M M W O f S t a d M : D M W at n o — d : 1.0 Hwnbar Sofcoofc Babtecl and/or Orada Faculty CoRMftcnt: Cooperating Teacher P IMM ratar lo ih* WMTM d M » tor* or to » • (M(Mi M tVALUATION* In Ott carraM PRACTICUM HANDBOOK tor atatractloM on OOnytatlnB tNa tt ma. PlANMNO AND OROAMZATIOM—OM*y of tons i n aad roMiftmtlon g| ^dMdyfi dMtoraaoM, Mriaty M d f p f aty plana, appro prteHMiiof a W a « * M . * * * » 1 1 1 1 1 1 TEACMMG 8KI.L8 AND STRATI 0 * 8 nmqj i iq dtacatatona. paelag. « M of raaoaroM, cajeaTO, aa i fc fy . EVALUATION—Mtectton and M a ol approprtala prooadarM la both tonaatlve aad aaaaaattva MANAGEMENT—haftdang. routtoaa and traaeMoaa, naMaa Ma ol Hata aad apaoa. greaping etadeata, RELATtONSHP WITH PUPf.8—rapport and aapathy, a w i M M 0( ladaeJael aaada. rtaaaroow atmoaphara. I I i 1 1 I COeaiUMCATlON—appropnai* PERSONAL OUAUTIE8—anrhMiaaia. MtWlM. rMoaroal PROFESSIONAL OUALmES-SELF - E VALUATION— aad iMcMng atyta. PLEASE CHECK ONE AT THE HUE OF HAKJNQ FMAL EVALUATION • Satisfactory cotaptatioA • NoTaattatactorv. Racoamand rapatttton ol PhaM at • Not Mtwiactory. Racoanand caraer o • Cooparaimo Taachar • Faculty ConMilant MSTRAUTKM OF F M A L FORMS (haan—SlwdM*. MM—On&mmloi . Bait—FMd Sarvtcaa APPENDIX G Child Art APPENDIX II Child Art APPENDIX I Child Art APPENDIX K Child Art 197 

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
https://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0054716/manifest

Comment

Related Items