UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Talking among grade seven peers as an influence on the teaching of drawing and on the acquisition of… Bevis, Vivian 1982

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

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1982_A8 B49.pdf [ 8.01MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0095031.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0095031-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0095031-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0095031-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0095031-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0095031-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0095031-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0095031-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0095031.ris

Full Text

TALKING AMONG GRADE SEVEN PEERS AS AN INFLUENCE ON THE TEACHING OF DRAWING AND ON THE ACQUISITION OF DRAWING SKILL by VIVIAN BEVIS B.A., Duke Un i v e r s i t y , 1959 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS i n . THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES Department of V i s u a l and Performing A r t s i n Education Faculty of Education We accept t h i s t h e s i s as conforming to the required standard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA May 1982 © V i v i a n Bevis, 1982 In presenting t h i s thesis i n p a r t i a l f u l f i l m e n t of the requirements for an advanced degree at the University of B r i t i s h Columbia, I agree that the Library s h a l l make i t f r e e l y available for reference and study. I further agree that permission for extensive copying of t h i s thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the head of my department or by his or her representatives. I t i s understood that copying or publication of t h i s thesis for f i n a n c i a l gain s h a l l not be allowed without my written permission. Department of Visual and Performing Arts in Education The University of B r i t i s h Columbia 1956 Main Mall Vancouver, Canada V6T 1Y3 Date Apr i l 22, 1982 DE-6 (.3/81) i i Abstract The purpose of the study was to f i n d out more about verbal and vi s u a l aspects of teaching a r t and learning to draw i n the classroom. I t was to determine what influence language has on v i s u a l processes i n drawing and to examine effecfcs'-"of-talking and verbal thinking on the acqui s i t i o n of drawing s k i l l s of pre-adolescent students i n grade seven. The study consisted of a 10-week drawing course f o r four classes of grade seven students i n an elementary school i n Vancouver, B r i t i s h Columbia. Instruction was the same f o r a l l classes except that i n two of the classes students were permitted to ta l k to each other while drawing"and i n two classes students were instructed not to ta l k while drawing. Data were collected and observations recorded using scores on drawing'tests, student evaluations, drawing surveys and teacher logs. Although scores on drawing tests showed l i t t l e difference between the two groups, consistent observations indicated that students did not ta l k and draw at the same time. Students who talked-, stopped drawing, completed fewer drawings, made less frequent reference to the model and followed fewer directions. When comparing the work of the two groups, teacher a t t i -tude toward the t a l k i n g group ref l e c t e d more d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n because of the higher incidence of incomplete work and the necessity of having to raise the voice i n order to be heard. i i i Table of Contents Page ABSTRACT 1 1 LIST OF TABLES v l i LIST OF FIGURES - v . i i i ACKNOWLEDGMENTS i x Chapter 1. INTRODUCTION 1 Introduction to the Study-. 1 Problem 1 S ignificance 2 Purpose 3 Propositions 3 Assumptions 3 Limitations k D e f i n i t i o n of Terms k Review of Literature 5 Seeing and Drawing 5 Seeing and Visual Attention 6 Visual Thinking and Drawing 6 2. DESIGN OF THE STUDY 11 Population 11 Procedure 11 Instructional A c t i v i t i e s 13 Measurement Instruments 13 Assignment of Subjects 14 i v Chapter Page 3. PRESENTATION OF DATA 15 Data From Drawing Surveys 15 Aids to Learning to Draw , 16 A b i l i t y to Draw 19 Awareness of A r t Elements .. 23 A b i l i t y to Form Mental Images 23 Importance of P r a c t i c e 23 Importance of Concentration 26 Discouragement 26 Data From Teacher Logs and Observations . .., 26 Recorded Incidence of Talking and Not Drawing 26 Recorded Incidence of Talking and Drawing 29 Incidence of f a i l u r e to Follow D i r e c t i o n s 29 Incidence of F a i l u r e to Refer to Model or Object 29 Incidence of Incomplete Drawings 29 Incidence of Second S t a r t s 34 D i f f e r i n g Approaches to the Drawing Task 34 Teacher A t t i t u d e s 34 Data From Drawing Evaluations 35 Concepts Learned .- 35 S a t i s f a c t i o n With Performance 37 A b i l i t y to Concentrate 37 Data From Drawing Scores ... 39 Draw A: Person Tests 41 Live Model Drawing Scores 41 V Chapter Page 4. DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS 44 Drawing Surveys 44 A i d s to L e a r n i n g to Draw 44 Estimated A b i l i t y i n Drawing 45 Awareness o f A r t Elements 47 A b i l i t y to Form Mental Images 47 Importance o f P r a c t i c e . . . . 4 8 Importance o f Concentration . 48 Discouragement i n Drawing 4 8 Teacher Logs and Observations 4 9 T a l k i n g and Not Drawing 4 9 T a l k i n g and Drawing 51 F o l l o w i n g D i r e c t i o n s 52 References to the Model and the Object 52 Complete and Incomplete Drawings 53 D i f f e r i n g Approaches 54 Teacher A t t i t u d e s 54 Drawing E v a l u a t i o n s 56 Concepts Learned .. . ; 57 S a t i s f a c t i o n With Performance 57 A b i l i t y to Concentrate 57 Drawing Scores 58 Draw A: Person Test" Scores . .. 59 L i v e Model Scores 60 5. CONCLUSIONS • 62 v i Page REFERENCES 66 BIBLIOGRAPHY ... 68 APPENDIX A. Drawing Surveys .' 72 P i l o t Survey 72 Drawing Survey I and I I ' 76 B. I n s t r u c t i o n a l A c t i v i t i e s 80 C. S c o r i n g C r i t e r i a f o r Drawings 100 C r i t e r i a f o r L i v e Models 100 C r i t e r i a f o r Draw A Person Test - Woman 103 C r i t e r i a f o r Draw A Person Test - Man 106 D. Drawing E v a l u a t i o n s 109 E. Samples o f Teacher Logs 117 v i i L i s t of Tables Tables Page 1. Number of Student Responses Ranking Aids i n Learning to Draw I? 2. Comparison of Group Responses Ranking Aids i n Learning to Draw .. 18 3. Self Assessment of A b i l i t y to Draw Items Well - Boys 20 4. Self Assessment of A b i l i t y to Draw Items Well - Girls 21 5. Changes in Assessed A b i l i t y to Draw Items Well 22 6. Number of Responses Indicating Awareness of Art Elements 24 7. Awareness of Art Elements for Treatment and Control Groups 25 8. Responses Indicating Relative Importance of Concentration 27 9. Responses Reporting Discouragement i n Drawing 28 10. Recorded Incidence of Talking and Not Drawing from Observation .. 30 11. Recorded Incidence of Talking and Drawing 31 12. Recorded Incidence of Failure to Follow Directions 32 13. Recorded Incidence of Failure to Refer to Model During Routine 10-Second Scan 33 14. Recorded Frequency of Remarks Reflecting Teacher Satisfaction and Dissatisfaction 36 15. Incidence of Reported Factors Inhibiting Concentration 38 16. Frequency of Responses Indicating Subjective Evaluation of Time Passing 40 17. Comparisons of Mean Scores on Draw A Person Tests and On Live Model Drawings 42 18. Comparisons of Median Scores on Draw A, Person Tests and On Live Model Drawings 43 v i i i L i s t of Figu r e s Figures Page 1. C h a i r s 81 2. L i v e Model I 83 3. Household Objects 85 k. S k e l e t o n '. 88 5. Bones and Pumpkins j Tone 90 6. Bones and Pumpkins 91 7. Memory B i c y c l e . .. 93 8. B i c y c l e : V i e w f i n d e r 9^  9. S e l f P o r t r a i t 96 10. L i v e Model I I 98 i x A cknow1edgements I would l i k e to express sincere appreciation f o r the help and encourage-ment I have received from my advisory committee' i n the preparation of t h i s 1 thesis. In p a r t i c u l a r , I should l i k e to thank Dr. James' Gray f o r his f i n e scholarly guidance, Boh Steele f o r his valuable insights on the drawing process and Michael Foster f o r his keen observations of children and t h e i r art . Special thanks i s also given to the children i n the Vancouver schools who continue to i n c i t e my interest and pique my c u r i o s i t y about the processes they employ i n the creation of t h e i r drawings. Thanks are also given most gra t e f u l l y to my husband, Dick, who d i d without his hiking companion throughout the preparation of t h i s work and to my colleague, Linda Glode, who adjusted her teaching schedule to my convenience throughout the process. 1 Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION Introduction to the .S tutiy ' Most c h i l d r e n love to draw. Their drawings have been the source of numerous studies and observations which have produced general agreement that children's a r t i s t i c a b i l i t y unfolds n a t u r a l l y i n a l i n e a r , sequential and demonstrable s e r i e s of stages from the pre-school s c r i b b l e to the pre-adolescent attempt at r e a l i s t i c representation, and that there the pro-gression stops. The c l e a r decline i n a r t i s t i c a c t i v i t y and the apparent decline i n some a r t i s t i c s k i l l s (Gardner, 1973; Kerr, 1937; Lowenfeld & B r i t t a i n , 1970; Read, 1945. Richards & Ross, 1967) suggest some s o r t of change or interference i n the developmental process a t the onset of adoles-cence. According to Harris (1963) some adolescents w i l l experience a resurgence of a r t i s t i c a c t i v i t y around the ages of 14 or 15 years, but others w i l l not. He concludes that unless a r e v i v a l of i n t e r e s t occurs by that age most c h i l d r e n w i l l show no f u r t h e r progress i n drawing. Theories which l i n k drawing s k i l l to increased perceptual and cognitive growth have not been able to explain why many adults do not progress beyond the drawing stage of 11-year olds (Lark-Horowitz, 1936). Problem The problem c e n t r a l to t h i s study i s the apparent cessation of drawing progress a t the time of adolescence or i n conjunction with the advent of formal mental operations (inhelder & Piaget, 1958)- Several explanations have been given to account f o r t h i s a r r e s t i n a r t i s t i c development. Among them are: 1. changes i n cognitive development; 2. influence of peers; 2 3. heightened i n t e r e s t i n s o c i a l and sexual matters; and k. increased dominance of language (Dorethy & Reeves, 1979; Rosensteil & Gardner, 1977). S i g n i f i c a n c e One of the theories most frequently advanced f o r the apparent cessation of drawing progress a t t h i s stage i s that language, which i s emphasized i n Western cul t u r e and education, becomes the dominant and most e f f i c i e n t mode f o r adolescents to express t h e i r i n c r e a s i n g l y complex and abstract concepts. The contention i s that, education, which stresses the importance of rapid recognition and naming of objects, encourages students to l e a r n to l a b e l v i s u a l s t i m u l i q u i c k l y and to pass on to the next stimulus before the f i r s t one has been examined i n depth. Students are l i k e l y , therefore, to become scanners of the environment instead of deep perceivers and when they do draw, to use f a c i l e symbols or stereotypes that represent what they already know instead of seeking new information from t h e i r v i s u a l surroundings. As verbal s k i l l s become more e f f i c i e n t f o r expressing and i n t e r p r e t i n g abstract concepts, many pre-adolescents stop making graphic e f f o r t s altogether and r e l y not only upon words to express themselves, but upon l i n g u i s t i c thought to process most information (Arnheim, 1969; Buhler, 1930; Edwards, 1979; H a r r i s , 1963; McKim, 1972)v H a r r i s (1963) f e e l s that unless c h i l d r e n develop graphic techniques needed to depict abstract q u a l i t i e s and r e l a t i o n -ships before adolescence, they w i l l l a t e r abandon drawing altogether, there-by reducing t h e i r opportunities f o r f u l l e r perceptual learning. Arnheim (1969), McKim (1972), Randhawa (1978) and Rohwer (1970) view the problem from a wider perspective. They think that c h i l d r e n should be taught to exercise both verbal and v i s u a l thought processes throughout t h e i r school experience. Although a r t programmes are often s i n g l e d out as the only place i n the curriculum where v i s u a l s k i l l s are stressed, the ex-tent to which they are consciously taught to the exclusion of verbal s k i l l s 3 i s not known. Dorethy and Reeves (1979) contend that more needs to be known about the verbal and v i s u a l aspects of the a r t l e a r n i n g process and that l i t t l e supporting data have been developed about the production of the v i s u a l a r t s i n r e a l i s t i c classroom s i t u a t i o n s . Purpose The purpose of t h i s study i s to examine possible verbal influences on the drawing process and on the teaching of drawing i n the classroom. P r i -marily, the study w i l l examine e f f e c t s of t a l k i n g among pre-adolescent peers i n grade seven i n r e l a t i o n to (a) a c q u i s i t i o n of drawing s k i l l , (b) v i s u a l attention, (c) classroom performance and (d) teacher a t t i t u d e s . Propositions The propositions to be investigated are thr e e - f o l d : 1. That t a l k i n g i n the a r t room among pre-adolescent grade seven students between the ages of 11 and 12 years i n h i b i t s drawing from d i r e c t observation and hampers a c q u i s i t i o n of representational drawing s k i l l . 2. That a c q u i s i t i o n of drawing s k i l l r e s u l t s i n more p o s i t i v e a t t i -tudes of students toward t h e i r drawing and a r t i s t i c a b i l i t y . 3- That t a l k i n g among peers i n the a r t room influences teacher a t t i -tudes toward the c l a s s . Assumptions There are three basic assumptions underlying t h i s study: 1. That the b r a i n has the a b i l i t y to process information i n two fundamentally d i f f e r e n t ways which have been v a r i o u s l y i d e n t i f i e d i n the l i t e r a t u r e of a r t and of psychology. For the purpose of t h i s study they are being c a l l e d verbal thinking and v i s u a l thinking. 2. That, by the onset of adolescence, the a b i l i t y to process i n f o r -mation v e r b a l l y becomes more e f f i c i e n t than--the a b i l i t y to process i t 4 visually. 3. That verbal thought and expression, having become dominant by the onset of adolescence, inhibit visual thought and expression. Limitations The study is limited to approximately 1 0 0 elementary students at the grade seven level in one urban school. No attempt is made to classify the developmental levels of these students nor to determine the preferred learn-ing style for individuals. Nor is i t necessary for the purposes of this study to allocate cognitive functions to one side of the brain or the other. The instructional activities are, with the exception of one memory exercise, based entirely on drawing from direct observation and do not purport to represent a complete range of classroom drawing activities. The teacher, in al l classes, is the observer and recorder. Definition of Terms 1 . Blind contour drawing - A contour drawing which is made while observing an object or group of objects and which is drawn without looking at the drawing in progress. 2. Cognitive - A l l mental operations involved in the receiving, storing and processing of information including those processes of sensory perception, memory, thinking and learning. 3. Contour drawing - A drawing in which the lines represent the edges of a form or a group of forms. 4. Deep perception - A synthesis of intelligence and vision whereby not only surfaces, but underlying internal structures and relationships are understood and appreciated. 5. Holistic - The simultaneous, global, processing of an array of information in a total configuration as opposed to sequential processing 5 of the separate parts. 6. I n t u i t i v e - D i r e c t and apparently unmediated knowledge; a judgment, meaning or idea that occurs to a person without any known process of r e -f l e c t i v e thinking. 7. Mode - A set of cognitive operations used to process information. 8. Representational drawing - A drawing made from d i r e c t observation of an object or group' of objects. 9. Stereotype - The reduction of v i s u a l form to a symbol or h a b i t u a l l y used convention. 10. Verbal thinking - The i n f e r r e d mental operation used to process l i n g u i s t i c information. 11. V i s u a l t hinking - The processing and i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of perceptual sensory data .gathered from i n t e r n a l or external sources which i s character-ized by global, simultaneous, i n t u i t i v e mental operations. Review of L i t e r a t u r e The r e l a t i o n s h i p s between (a) seeing and drawing, (b) seeing and v i s u a l a t t e n t i o n , and (c) v i s u a l thinking and drawing from observation have occupied much of the l i t e r a t u r e on representational drawing. Seeing and drawing. In 19^ 1 Nicolaides wrote that drawing had l i t t l e to do with technique, aesthetics or conceptions, but only with the "act of correc t observation." H i l l (1966) asserted that the r o l e of the teacher was to help the student l e a r n to observe by providing experiences designed to waken h i s v i s i o n and to discourage anything that might i n h i b i t v i s u a l exploration. H i l l f e l t that the a b i l i t y to draw depended not only on technique, but also on the a b i l i t y to attend to the v i s u a l environment and perceive i t f u l l y and deeply. 6 There i s general agreement that c h i l d r e n , as well as adults, do not use t h e i r f u l l f a c u l t y f o r seeing. They tend to react automatically to s t i m u l i and s e l e c t from various s i g n a l s only those which provide information r e l a t i v e to t h e i r momentary needs. Much escapes t h e i r perception due e i t h e r to an u n d i s c i p l i n e d v i s u a l sense or to a preoccupation with verbal i d e n t i -f i c a t i o n of things. The emphasis on naming objects creates the i l l u s i o n of knowing the ohject and suppresses the willingness to examine i t from a f r e s h perspective. McKim (1972) thinks that v i s u a l mental a b i l i t y which i s not used decays and that premature verbal closure contributes to perceptual atrophy. Children look but do not attend to what they see. Seeing and v i s u a l a t t e n t i o n . Mulholland (1978) studied v i s u a l atten-t i o n with electroencephalograms and found that a t t e n t i o n to v i s u a l s t i m u l i i s u s u a l l y associated with a reduction of alpha rhythms. ' When a novel or relevant stimulus i s f i r s t presented the alpha rhythms are suppressed and gradually recover to o r i g i n a l l e v e l s as the stimulus becomes f a m i l i a r . Studies with c h i l d r e n watching T. V. showed high alpha l e v e l s which i n d i -cated that they were not r e a l l y attending to what they were seeing. Schwartz, Davidson and Pugash (1976) studied v i s u a l a t t e n t i o n i n r e l a t i o n to hemispheric functions of the brain. They trained subjects to produce more alpha rhythms i n one c o r t i c a l hemisphere than i n the other. When subjects produced more alpha rhythms i n the r i g h t hemisphere, they reported - s i g n i f i c a n t l y more verbal cognitions. When they produced more i n the l e f t they reported more v i s u a l , non-verbal cognitions. V i s u a l thinking and drawing. T h e a b i l i t y to draw from d i r e c t observa-t i o n depends on technique and on the a b i l i t y to attend c a r e f u l l y to the nuances of v i s u a l form. In order to observe properly f o r the purposes of corr e c t drawing H i l l (1966) asserts that the mind has to be emptied of a l l 7 extraneous thought and encumbrances. The r o l e of the drawing i n s t r u c t o r i s to stimulate the student's v i s i o n and to discourage anything which i n h i b i t s v i s u a l inquiry. The teacher's r o l e i s to make the student d i r e c t l y aware of the sensations that impinge upon v i s i o n , but which do not often reach conscious l e v e l s of thought. Maslow, May, and McKim ( i n McMullan, 1976) a l l r e f e r to conditions s i m i l a r to H i l l ' s awareness of sensations which impinge upon v i s u a l thought but which do not reach conscious or r a t i o n a l l e v e l s of thought as pre-conditions f o r creative thought. They describe an open, relaxed state of mind which i s characterized by global, open perception. Maslow (1971) c a l l s i t "mindless perception" by which he means an a b i l i t y to become " l o s t i n the present" and which he f e e l s i s an e s s e n t i a l element i n c r e a t i v i t y . May (1975) c a l l s the same q u a l i t y "detached involvement" and McKim (1972) r e f e r s to i t as "relaxed a t t e n t i o n . " In a l l of these, i r r e l e v a n t tensions are relaxed i n order to release f u l l energy and at t e n t i o n to crea t i v e tasks a t hand. According to Ayrton (1957) the process of drawing involves, above a l l e l s e , p u t t i n g v i s u a l i n t e l l i g e n c e to work. Although the verbal mode of processing information (verbal thinking) has been thought of as dominant, i t has long been recognized that a v i s u a l mode ( v i s u a l thinking) operates i n human i n t e l l i g e n c e as well ( G u i l f o r d , 1967). This d u a l i s t i c nature of thinking has been i d e n t i f i e d and l a b e l e d v a r i o u s l y as (a)-Secondary and Primary Processes (Freud), (b) Accommodation and A s s i m i l a t i o n (Piaget), (c) A. Cognition and B. Cognition (Maslow), (d) Convergent and Divergent Thinking (Taylor), (e) R e a l i s t i c and A u t i s t i c Thinking ( B l e u l e r ) , ( f ) In-t e l l e c t u a l and I n t u i t i v e or Sequential and Simultaneous (Luria) and (g) Line a r and L a t e r a l (deBono) ( a l l c i t e d i n Samples, 1976). 8 Despite the l a b e l s , the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of each p a i r of mental opera-t i o n s are b a s i c a l l y the same. The f i r s t term of each p a i r r e f e r s to a par t - b y - p a r t , l i n e a r , l o g i c a l way o f p r o c e s s i n g i n f o r m a t i o n and the second to a g l o b a l , h o l i s t i c , i n t u i t i v e process. O r n s t e i n (1972), Pavio (1971) and Randhawa (l97l) assume th a t the two modes are f u n c t i o n a l l y independent but interconnected. However, because the f u n c t i o n a l aspect of v i s u a l . t h i n k i n g i s u s u a l l y embedded i n a v e r b a l context i t can only be s t u d i e d by t a k i n g language e x p l i c i t l y i n t o account e i t h e r by c o n t r o l l i n g i t o r by systematic v a r i a t i o n i n order to determine i t s i n f l u e n c e on v i s u a l processing. Wachiowiak (1971) "believes f i r m l y t h a t c h i l d r e n and adolescents cannot p r o p e r l y a t t e n d to v i s u a l tasks i n a r t while v e r b a l i z i n g o r s o c i a l i z i n g . Both he and Greenberg (1970) maintain t h a t a t t e n t i o n and c o n c e n t r a t i o n are e s s e n t i a l to the productive use o f any drawing p e r i o d and are the keys to q u a l i t y i n c h i l d r e n ' s a r t . Greenberg f e e l s t h a t c h i l d r e n need q u i e t time f o r t h i n k i n g d u r i n g a r t and t h a t teachers who v e r b a l i z e c o n s t a n t l y probably i n t e r f e r e w i t h t h e i r students' c o n c e n t r a t i o n . Linderman and Herberholz (197-J-) recognize the e f f e c t i v e n e s s of a g l o b a l - a t - a t t e n t i o n stance of open p e r c e p t i o n whereby c h i l d r e n l e a r n to s o r t and c l a s s i f y a wide v a r i e t y of s t i m u l i i n s t e a d of s e l e c t i n g a few f o r t h e i r a t t e n t i o n and c l o s i n g out the r e s t . They c a u t i o n , however, t h a t t h i s s o r t i n g process should not be a ve r b a l one f o r c h i l d r e n , but should be accomplished as much as p o s s i b l e through sensory experience without constant r e s o r t to word d e s c r i p t o r s . Teachers of a d u l t drawing students a l s o note the n e c e s s i t y to c o n t r o l v e r b a l i n f l u e n c e s . Simmons and Winer (1972) and Edwards (1979) recommend s i l e n c e d u r i n g the drawing s e s s i o n f o r t h e i r a d u l t students. Simmons and Winer advocate a p e r i o d of f o c u s s i n g i n s i l e n c e before commencing a drawing. A l l f e e l t h a t drawing i s mainly a wordless process. Edwards argues t h a t 9 f a i l u r e to s h i f t from a verbal to a v i s u a l mode of thinking i s the greatest obstacle to achieving deep perception and prevents the a c q u i s i t i o n of drawing s k i l l s . She f e e l s that the key to l e a r n i n g to draw i s i n s e t t i n g up conditions which allow students to make the mental s h i f t from verbal to non-verbal ways of processing information. These conditions must involve the teacher's i n h i b i t i n g of f a c i l e , verbal responses to v i s u a l s t i m u l i by presenting the student with exercises which can most e a s i l y be processed only v i s u a l l y and f o r which there i s no quick l i n g u i s t i c response. These might include drawing an object from an un f a m i l i a r viewpoint or using b l i n d contour drawing techniques. Everything possible should be done to d i s -courage verbal thought and exchange during drawing sessions. I f c h i l d r e n are going to l e a r n to draw, i t seems necessary f o r them to receive i n s t r u c t i o n before the onset of adolescence a t which time t h e i r natural a r t i s t i c development seems to decline. Because a r t rooms where c h i l d r e n are asked to l e a r n to draw are seldom quiet places, and because there i s evidence that c h i l d r e n are being hampered i n t h e i r a b i l i t y to function v i s u a l l y by verbal and l i n g u i s t i c aspects of t h e i r education, an examination of the v a r i a b l e of language i n the drawing process i s of i n t e r e s t to a r t educators and, as such, has prompted t h i s study. The argument presented so f a r i s that cognitive growth i n c h i l d r e n i s enhanced through v i s u a l as well as verbal developmental experiences asso-c i a t e d with the processes and products of drawing. Another basic a f f i r m a -t i o n i s that experiences which promote v i s u a l concentration and a t t e n t i o n are necessary to a t t a i n i n g successively deeper l e v e l s of perceptual aware-ness and that t a l k i n g can i n h i b i t v i s u a l a t t e n t i o n to the detriment of achieving these l e v e l s . Because the a b i l i t y to draw from d i r e c t observa-t i o n depends heavily on the a b i l i t y to attend v i s u a l l y , i t i s i n s t r u c t i v e 10 to examine the f a c t o r s which i n t e r f e r e with v i s u a l attention, such as t a l k i n g . Evidence has "been offered to support the view that despite t h e o r e t i c a l d i f f e r e n c e s among scholars regarding the reasons f o r the decline i n adoles-cent drawing s k i l l , there i s agreement that t h i s decline coincides with the beginning of adolescence a t a time when the verbal mode of processing i n -formation has become dominant, and that more needs to be known about the r e l a t i o n s h i p between verbal and v i s u a l information processing. Useful approaches to the problem would be to examine how verbal and v i s u a l opera-tions f u n c t i o n separately, how they work together and what i n h i b i t o r y e f f e c t s , i f any, they have on each other. In an e f f o r t to supply a small empirical basis f o r examining these r e l a t i o n s h i p s , t h i s study has been designed to focus on the variable of peer t a l k i n g on the drawing process i n the a r t room of a reasonably average population of grade seven students. 11 Chapter 2 DESIGN OF THE STUDY Four classes of grade seven students i n Vancouver, B r i t i s h Columbia p a r t i c i p a t e d i n a 10 week drawing study to explore the e f f e c t s on t h e i r draw-ing of t a l k i n g among peers i n the a r t room. Population A t o t a l of 110 grade seven students (52 boys and 58 g i ^ l s ) whose mean age was 12 years and 5 months p a r t i c i p a t e d i n the study. A l l but 17 students had attended the same school or i t s annex since kindergarten and none was new to the school t h i s year. One new student d i d j o i n the group mid-way, but l e f t the school before the end of the project. The elementary school i s i n a stable, predominantly C a u c a s i a n area and only one student d i d not have E n g l i s h as a f i r s t language. Procedure During the 10 week study, each c l a s s had one 80-minute drawing session per week. On Week 1 of the study a Drawing Survey, which included the Goodenough-Harris Draw A Person Test ( i n H a r r i s , 1963), was given to a l l classes (see Appendix A.) . The purposes of the Drawing Survey were to (a) as-sure equitable d i v i s i o n of the classes into two treatment (no-talking) and two co n t r o l ( t a l k i n g ) groups, (b) f i n d out more about the population under study and (c) provide general comparisons regarding changes i n a t t i t u d e s and opinions at the end of the study. The responses' t c the survey were tabulated, the drawings were scored and the classes were separated as nearly as possible into treatment and control groups on the basis of mean drawing a b i l i t y . In order to stimulate i n t e r e s t i n the drawing u n i t , the f i r s t i n s t r u c -t i o n a l a c t i v i t y was given on Week 2 (see Appendix B). No t a l k i n g was 12 permitted i n the treatment groups when students were drawing from d i r e c t observation. Moderate, casual conversation was allowed i n the con t r o l groups. During Week 3 a l l classes drew from a l i v e model." These drawings were scored according to a scale developed by the author and based on modi-f i e d DA.PT scoring c r i t e r i a (see Appendix C). For the next f i v e weeks a l l classes took part i n the same i n s t r u c t i o n a l a c t i v i t i e s and discussions during which the treatment groups were asked not to t a l k when drawing while the con t r o l groups were permitted to do so. At the end of each session students indicated whether or not they considered t h e i r drawings complete or incomplete and f i l l e d out a Drawing Evaluation questionnaire (see Appendix D). They were asked to evaluate themselves on the basis of (a) concepts learned, (b) s a t i s f a c t i o n with performance and (c) a b i l i t y to concentrate. Items regarding the a b i l i t y to concentrate i n -cluded a subjective evaluation of time passing and the naming of fa c t o r s which students f e l t i n h i b i t e d t h e i r concentration. Observations of student behaviours and a t t i t u d e s were noted throughout the study by the teacher-as-researcher. The observations were made by scanning a l l students f o r approximately ten seconds at the beginning, middle and end of a l l drawing a c t i v i t i e s , and were recorded i n the Teacher Logs (see Appendix E). P a r t i c u l a r note was made of students who were (a) t a l k i n g and not drawing, (b) t a l k i n g and drawing, (c) following d i r e c t i o n s , (d) r e -f e r r i n g frequently to the model and (e) using divergent approaches to the drawing task. Video tape recordings were also used to record student be-haviours during the drawing sessions i n Weeks 6 and 7. During Week 9, students again drew from a l i v e model. The drawings were again scored according to the modified DAPT c r i t e r i a and scores were compared f o r i n d i v i d u a l and mean diff e r e n c e s . A second Drawing Survey and 13 Draw A, Person Test were administered to a l l groups i n s i l e n c e during the 10th week of the study. The responses on the survey and the scores on the DAPT were tabulated and r e s u l t s compared to the i n i t i a l r e s u l t s f o r i n d i v i d u a l s and f o r groups. I n s t r u c t i o n a l A c t i v i t i e s The drawing a c t i v i t i e s l i s t e d below were chosen to minimize f a c i l e , s t e r e o t y p i c a l responses and to encourage as much close observation and fr e s h perception as possible. A c t i v i t y 1 - Chairs (negative space) A c t i v i t y 2 - L i v e model (freehand drawing) A c t i v i t y 3 - Household objects (contour) A c t i v i t y 4 - Skeleton (volume and gesture) A c t i v i t y 5 - Bones and pumpkins (tone and volume) A c t i v i t y 6 - S e l f p o r t r a i t s ( b l i n d contour) A c t i v i t y 7 - B i c y c l e s (viewfinders) A c t i v i t y 8 - L i v e model (freehand drawing) Measurement Instruments A p i l o t Drawing Survey and DAPT were given to 102 grade seven students i n the same school i n June .before the study was begun the following Septem-ber. The purpose of the p i l o t survey was to f i n d out the range of responses and drawing scores f o r that group i n order to compare i t to the study popu-l a t i o n . In a d d i t i o n to the p i l o t survey, the following measurement i n s t r u -ments were used: 1. - Drawing Survey • I: and I-I; 2. Goodenough-Harris Draw A. Person Test 3. Modified DAPT c r i t e r i a f o r L i v e Model 4. Student Drawing Evaluations 5. Teacher Logs of observations 14 Assignment of Subjects An e f f o r t was made to d i v i d e the fo u r classes into two nearly equal a b i l i t y groups. The mean spread on the i n i t i a l DAPT scores f o r the classes chosen-for the treatment groups was f o u r points ( 5 7 and 5 3 ) • The mean spread was the same f o r the control groups ( 5 4 and 4 8 ) . Glasses were sche-duled i n the morning before and a f t e r recess and were arranged so that each of the groups had one c l a s s which met f i r s t thing i n the morning and one which met r i g h t a f t e r recess. The classes were numbered by d i v i s i o n . The treatment (or no talking) groups were D i v i s i o n s 1 and 4 . D i v i s i o n s 2 and 3 made up the control (or talking) groups. 15 Chapter 3 PRESENTATION OF DATA Data f o r the study were gathered from four main sources: Drawing Sur-veys, Teacher Logs, Student Evaluations and Drawing Scores. Pre-treatment p r o f i l e s were obtained by comparing responses on the P i l o t Survey to res-ponses on the f i r s t Drawing Survey. This comparison showed l i t t l e or no di f f e r e n c e between the two grade seven population's, but d i d reveal d i s t i n c t d i f f e r e n c e s between the responses of boys and g i r l s i n each survey. Results, have, therefore, been analyzed to show the dif f e r e n c e s between responses f o r boys and g i r l s w i t h i n the treatment and co n t r o l groups. Data are presented which indicate these d i f f e r e n c e s when they occur. E f f e c t s of the treatment were determined by comparing responses both between and wi t h i n the co n t r o l and treatment groups. Because i n d i v i d u a l c l a s s e s were subject to quirks of scheduling and i n t e r r p u t i o n which might influence r e s u l t s , i t was deemed us e f u l to compare separate r e s u l t s f o r each c l a s s w i t h i n the control and treatment groups. Data which r e f l e c t e f f e c t s of the treatment, d i f f e r e n c e s between sexes or notable d i s t i n c t i o n s or s i m i l a r i t i e s among classes or between groups are summarized i n the follow-ing discussion. Tables of raw scores which indicate these e f f e c t s and which supplement the d i s c u s s i o n are also included. Data from Drawing Surveys Drawing Surveys were given at the beginning and end of the study. They y i e l d e d information on the grade seven population as a whole, on dif f e r e n c e s between boys and g i r l s and on changes i n a t t i t u d e s and opinions which occurred during the course of the study. The responses on the f i r s t Survey were compared with the responses on a P i l o t Drawing Survey given the previous 16 spring to four classes of grade seven students i n the same school. Although the p i l o t group was older by an average of 7.2 months, responses between the two groups were s i m i l a r . From t h i s u s e f u l , but tentative, comparison, i t seems reasonable to assume that maturation was not a sizeable f a c t o r i n determining response. I t might also indicate that the changes i n a t t i t u d e s and opinions which showed up between Drawing Surveys I, and II r e f l e c t e d actual d i f f e r e n c e s i n the treatment between the two groups rather than increased maturity of the students. Questions on the Surveys asked students to indicate (a) how they learned to draw, (b) what they f e l t they drew best, (c) how aware they were of cer-t a i n s p e c i f i c a r t elements, and (d) how well they could form mental images. Although t o t a l responses on the P i l o t Survey and the f i r s t Drawing Survey were s i m i l a r , they both revealed d i s t i n c t d i f f e r e n c e s between the responses of boys and g i r l s . These d i f f e r e n c e s were most pronounced i n (a) ranking of aids i n l e a r n i n g to draw, (b) assessed a b i l i t y i n drawing, (c) stated awareness of a r t elements and (d) stated a b i l i t y to form mental images. A disc u s s i o n of the >. -data -from the Drawing Surveys i s provided below. Aids to l e a r n i n g to draw. On both surveys boys f e l t that copying photos and cartoons was the most help i n l e a r n i n g to draw. On the f i r s t survey g i r l s thought that looking a t other people's drawings helped them the most. On the second survey they changed t h e i r opinion and ranked drawing from r e a l objects as the most help (see Table l ) . There was no appreciable d i f f e r e n c e between the c o n t r o l and treatment groups' response i n e i t h e r survey (see Table 2). On the second survey, however, there was an increase of those who ranked lessons as an a i d to drawing and a decrease of those who re-ported that they learned most from looking at other people's drawings. The t o t a l number of students who f e l t that drawing from r e a l objects was an a i d increased only s l i g h t l y . 17 Table 1 Number of Student Responses Ranking Aids i n Learning to Draw Ranked 1st Ranked 2nd Ranked 3rd Ranked 4th Aids P S 1 S 2 P S 1 S 2 P S 1 S 2 P S 1 S 2 Boys Lessons > 2 9 3 2 7 6 4 3 21 23 20 Drawing Real Objects 10 14 8 6 11 16 6 12 12 2 3 1 Other People's Drawings 16 14 9 11 8 8 7 8 15 5 4 7 Copying Photos 21 19 17 9 8 7 4 2 8 5 5 8 Totals 51 49 43 29 29 38 23 24 38 33 35 36 G i r l s Lessons 2 4 10 4 6 10 6 7 8 20 21 22 Drawing Real Objects 15 16 24 10 11 16 10 11 5 4 3 6 Other People's Drawings 25 22 7 7 7 12 12 11 20 2 1 •i'9 Copying Photos 6 8 12 16 15 11 7 7 14 8 9 12 Totals 48 50 53 37 34 49 35 36 47 34 34 49 p = s l = P i l o t Study -Drawing Survey I ; Drawing Survey I I 18 Table 2 Comparison of Group Responses Ranking Aids i n Learning to Draw Aids Ranked S l 1st S2 Ranked S l 2nd S2 Ranked 3rd S l S2 Ranked • S l 4th S2 Control Lessons 3 4 3 11 2 4 23 16 Drawing Real" .Objects 14 19 7 15 12 11 3 2 Other People's Drawings 19 6 : 9 15 8 15 0 10 Copying Photos 12 18 12 5 6 15 5 9 Totals . 38 47 31 46 28 45 31 37 Treatment Lessons 4 10 5 6 9 7 22 16 Drawing Real Objects 16 14 15 17 9 6 3 5 Other People's Drawings 17 9 6 5 12 19 4 6 Copying Photos 15 11 13 12 8 8 7 11 Totals 52 44 39 35 38 40 36 38 S^ = Drawing Survey I S9= Drawing Survey I I 19 A b i l i t y to draw. On Survey I I boys indicated most frequently that they were f a i r l y good at drawing cartoon characters, mountains and landscapes, guns and tanks, b a t t l e scenes and space scenes. They indicated most f r e -quently, as they had on Survey ' I . t h a t they were not good at drawing eyeryday objects, clothes and fashion design, horses, people or faces (side view). This was not s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t from the f i r s t survey where they indicated that they drew best planes or boats, b a t t l e scenes, cartoon characters and space scenes. G i r l s on the second survey responded most frequently that they were good at drawing mountains and landscapes, cartoon characters, trees and flowers, faces ( f r o n t view) and clothes and fashion design while on the f i r s t survey they f e l t they drew everyday objects, trees and flowers, mountains and landscapes and cartoon characters best. They indicated on both surveys that they f e l t they were not good at drawing guns and tanks, b a t t l e scenes, planes or boats, cars and trucks or machines. Four of the categories i n which the boys f e l t they drew best, the g i r l s f e l t they drew worst. In only one of the g i r l s ' best categories (fashion) d i d boys indi c a t e they drew worst. Cartoon characters was the one category i n which both boys and g i r l s f e l t they drew well. By the end of the study there was a marked increase i n the number of items that students f e l t they were able to draw well and a decrease i n the number they f e l t they drew poorly (see Tables 3 a n c - 4). A l l classes except D i v i s i o n 1 (treatment) showed an increase i n the number of items students f e l t they could draw f a i r l y well (see Table 5)- The con t r o l group was responsible f o r the greatest increase i n indicated a b i l i t y to draw items f a i r l y w e l l . The treatment group d i d not r e f l e c t much change between Surveys I and .II. 20 Table 3 S e l f Assessment of A b i l i t y to Draw Items Well -Comparison of Boys' Responses on F i r s t and Second Drawing Survey Very Well Average Not Very Well Items S l S2 S l S2 v . S2 Space Scenes 13 16 29 25 7 /'•'7 Trees and Flowers 4 2 23 24 23 21 Mountains and Landscape 9 . • 17 24 15 17 16 Cartoon Characters 15 18 20 22 15 8 Battle Scenes 17 16 17 23 16 9 Monsters 12 14 17 19 21 14 Guns and Tanks 14 17 21 19 15 10 Buildings 11 14 18 25 21 9 Everyday Objects 5 10 22 16 23 22 Clothes, Fashion 2 3 6 11 . 42 34 Faces - Side View 2 3 22 22 26 23 Faces - Front View 6 5 20 21 24 20 People 5 8 13 14 31 24 Horses 4 3 10 12 37 32 Other Animals 3 6 16 18 31 19 Planes or Boats 16 20 20 21 14 7 Cars, -Trucks,'-; Machines 13 15 2 2 2 2 14 10 Totals 151 187 321 330 377 285 + +36 +9 -92 21 Table 4 S e l f Assessment of A b i l i t y to Draw Items V e i l -Comparison of G i r l s ' Responses on F i r s t and Second Drawing Survey Very Well Average Not Very Well Items S j L S 2 S l S 2 S l S 2 Space Scenes 3 4 17 10 33 20 Trees and Flowers 20 21 29 31 3 0 Mountains and Landscape- 1? 25 25 22 12 5 Cartoon Characters 17 25 23 19 13 9 Battle Scenes 0 0 2 7 51 47 Monsters 3 9 20 20 30 24 Guns and Tanks 1 0 ' 7 3 47 49 Buildings 6 10 29 27 18 18 Everyday Objects 5 8 35 30 8 14 Clothes, Fashion 6 16 25 22 20 15 Faces - Side View 7 14 24 20 22 19 Faces - Front View 8 17 25 21 20 15 People 6 12 24 25 23 16 Horses 7 4 15 27 31 22 Other Animals 12 10 24 28 17 15 Planes or Boats 0 3 18 18 35 33 Cars, Trucks, Machines _2 _0 _8 12 43 - 39 Totals 120 178 350 342 426 360 +58 +8 -66 Table 5 Changes i n Assessed A b i l i t y to Draw Items Well Groups Boys G i r l s Treatment Division 1 -6 -2 Division 4 +12 +20 Total +6 +6 Control Division 2 +9 +28 Division 3 ±22 +18 Total +31 +46 23 Awareness of a r t elements. At the end of the study more g i r l s than boys i n a l l classes reported more frequent awareness of s p e c i f i c a r t ele-ments such as source of l i g h t , negative space, size relationships and tonal values as they drew (see Table 6). In the control groups, 52 students re-ported that they were very often aware of these elements compared to 36 students i n the treatment groups. Both treatment and control groups reported about the same number of students who were sometimes aware of these elements. However, the control groups recorded more responses (73) than the treatment groups (56) from students who said they were hardly ever aware of these elements (see Table 7). Comparisons between the two Drawing Surveys indicated that the greatest amount of change occurred i n (a) reported a b i l i t y to form mental images, (b) attitudes toward the importance of practice i n learning to draw, (c) attitudes toward the importance of concentration while drawing and (d) degree of discouragement i n drawing. A b i l i t y to form mental images. There was an increase of 16 i n the number of students who could form a clear mental picture of an item at the end of the study. Boys and g i r l s made equal gains although more g i r l s (40) than boys (32) reported that they could picture a mental image c l e a r l y . The number of students who reported that they could not form a mental picture of an object at a l l increased by one. Importance of practice. Only 2k% of the students at the beginning of the study f e l t that practice was very important i n learning to draw. At the end of the 10 weeks t h i s number had increased to 59% f o r a l l classes. This increase was f a i r l y evenly divided between groups and between boys and g i r l s . 24 Table 6 Number of Responses Indi c a t i n g Awareness of A r t Elements f o r Boys and G i r l s Often Aware Sometimes Aware Seldom Aware A r t Elements S± S £ ' S 1 S 2 S 1 S £ •Boys" Source of L i g h t 0 1 3 23 27 24 Negative Space 0 6 1 21 48 20 S i z e Relationships 11 16 13 21 26 11 Tonal Values _1 _6 26 44 17 Totals 12 29 22 91 165 72 G i r l s Source of L i g h t 1 3 12 33 37 15 Negative Space 0 11 6 23 44 20 Size Relationships 14 28 10 16 26 9 Tonal Values 13 17 9 22 38 15 Totals 28 59 37 94 145 59 Table 7 Number of Responses Indicating Awareness of A r t Elements f o r Treatment and Control Groups Often Aware Sometimes Aware Seldom Aware Art Elements S± S 2 S 1 S 2 S± S g Treatment Source of Light 1 1 8 27 49 18 Negative Space 0 8 4 24 45 17 Size Relationships 8 16 15 25 21 6 Tonal Values _1 11 _7 22 42 15 Totals 10 36 34 98 157 56 Control Source of Light 0 3 7 29 35 21 Negative Space 0 9 3 22 47 23 Size Relationships 17 28 8 12 31 14 Tonal Values _3_ 12 _8 26 40 15 Totals 20 52 26 89 154 73 S2= Drawing Survey I Drawing Survey I I 26 Importance of concentration. The number of students who thought that concentration was important when drawing from observation also increased f o r a l l classes. In the f i r s t Drawing Survey only 30^  of the students f e l t concentration was important whereas 80% of them thought i t was i n the second survey. There did not seem to be any clear difference between the responses of boys and g i r l s or between treatment and control groups (see Table 8). Discouragement. The number of students who reported they were often discouraged with t h e i r drawings f e l l s l i g h t l y by the end of the study f o r the treatment groups. The control groups, however, reported two more stu-dents who were often discouraged with t h e i r drawing at the end of the study than at the beginning (see Table 9). This difference was reversed i n the next category as the treatment groups reported two fewer students who were hardly ever discouraged and the control reported a gain of four students who said they hardly ever became discouraged with t h e i r drawing. Data from Teacher Logs and Observations Throughout the study observations of student behaviours were noted i n the Teacher Logs. P a r t i c u l a r attention was given to (a) students who were ta l k i n g and not drawing from observation, (b) students who were t a l k i n g and drawing from observation at the same time, (c) students who were not follow-ing directions, (d) students who did and did not r e f e r to the model or object within 10 seconds of being observed, (e) the number of incomplete drawings, ( f ) the number of second s t a r t s , (g) d i f f e r i n g approaches to the drawing task and (h) teacher s a t i s f a c t i o n and attitudes toward the class. Recorded incidence of t a l k i n g and not drawing from observation, stu-dents who were t a l k i n g during the routine 10 second scan of student beha-viours at the beginning, middle and end of each drawing a c t i v i t y were 27 Table 8 Number of Responses I n d i c a t i n g Relative Importance of Concentration While Drawing Very Important. Somewhat Important Not Important Groups •• S. Treatment D i v i s i o n 1 D i v i s i o n 4 Total 7 20 _9 23 16 43 +27 12 6 13 _8 25 14 -11 7 J) 7 0 _o 0 -7 Control D i v i s i o n 2 D i v i s i o n 3 T o t a l 7 22 _8 24 15 46 +31 17 4 11 . _3 28 7 -21 4 _8 12 0 _0 0 -12 S^= Drawing Survey I S 2= Drawing Survey I I 28 Table 9 Number of Responses Reporting Discouragement i n Drawing Often Discouraged Hardly Ever Never Discouraged Groups S^ Treatment Div i s i o n 1 14 11 11 10 0 3 Division 4 15 12 11 10 _1 . _0 Total 29 23 22 20 1 3 Control D i v i s i o n 2 D i v i s i o n 3 Total 13 18 31 20 13 33 10 _ Z 17 6 1 5 21 0. 3 0 J ) 0 S^ = Drawing Survey I S0= Drawing Survey I I 29 assessed according to whether they were t a l k i n g and, at the same time, drawing from observation. Out of 315 observations of students' t a l k i n g , 301 were made of students who were t a l k i n g but who were not, at the same time, drawing (see Table 10). Recorded incidence -of talking-and drawing. Only 14 out of the 315 observations of students' t a l k i n g noted students who were t a l k i n g and drawing at the same time (see Table l l ) . Five of these notations occurred i n one class during a>-memory drawing exercise, two occurred while students dotted freckles on a drawing of a l i v e model and made random marks f o r the hair and seven occurred while students were colouring i n negative spaces with o i l pastels during the f i r s t i n s t r u c t i o n a l a c t i v i t y . Incidence of f a i l u r e to follow directions. In each of the drawing a c t i v i t i e s , with the exception of the l i v e models, a s p e c i f i c technique was emphasized. Students were asked to use outlines of negative space, b l i n d contours, gesture, tonal values, contour and continuous contour l i n e s and viewfinders. Instances were recorded whenever directions were not being followed during the scan (see Table 12). Out of 251 instances, students i n the control groupe.failed to follow directions i n 146 cases while students i n the treatment groups f a i l e d to follow them i n 105 of the cases. Incidence of f a i l u r e to refe r to model;or object. During the routine scans of the classroom, students were observed f o r approximately 10 seconds to see i f they referred to the model or the -; object in- that i n t e r v a l . A t o t a l of 349 notations were made. The control groups f a i l e d to observe the model i n 214 (or 6l%) of the cases and the treatment groups f a i l e d i n 135 (or 39%) of the cases (see Table 13). Incidence of incomplete drawings. At the end of each session students were asked to indicate whether t h e i r drawings were complete or incomplete. Table 10 Recorded Incidence of Talking and Not Drawing from Observation Drawing A c t i v i t y Treatment Control Chairs 6 28 Live Model I 4 40 Household Objects 9 49 Skeleton 12 49 Bones and Pumpkins 4 14 B i c y c l e - Memory 3 34 - Viewfirider 8 26 S e l f P o r t r a i t 0 0 Live Model I I 17 30 Total 63 270 Table 11 Recorded Incidence of Talking and Drawing Drawing A c t i v i t y Treatment Control Chairs 2 5 L i v e Model I 0 0 Household Objects 0 0 Skeleton 0 0 Bones and Pumpkins 0 0 B i c y c l e - Memory 0 - Viewfinder 0 0 S e l f P o r t r a i t 0 0 L i v e Model I I _0 _2 Total 2 12 Table 12 Recorded Incidence of Failure to Follow Directions Drawing Instruction Treatment Control Outline of Negative Space 11 15 Continuous Contour 42 43 Gesture and Volume 20 35 B l i n d Contour 19 27 Use of Viewfinder 13 26 Total 105 146 Table 13 Recorded Incidence of Failure to Refer to Model or Object During Routine 10-Second Scan Drawing A c t i v i t y Treatment Control Chairs 9 23 Live Model I 36 47 Household Objects 26 36 Skeleton 25 33 Bones and Pumpkins 11 13 Bicycle - Viewfinder 9 27 Live Model I I 19 35 Total 135 214 34 The incidence of incomplete drawings was over four times greater f o r the control groups (l3l) than i t was f o r the treatment groups (32). Incidence of second s t a r t s . The number of students who required a clean sheet of paper i n order to make a second s t a r t on t h e i r drawing was recorded. The control groups made 28 clean-sheet second st a r t s compared to 4 for- the treatment groups. D i f f e r i n g approaches to the drawing task. The majority of students proceeded to draw i n a l o g i c a l top to bottom or l e f t to r i g h t series of steps. They b u i l t up t h e i r drawings i n a part-by-part sequence by f i r s t o u t l i n i n g a section and then f i l l i n g i n the d e t a i l s . There were 24 observed exceptions to t h i s , a l l occurring during the drawing of the l i v e models, i n which students f i r s t -planned the entirety of t h e i r drawings before they went back and completed the d e t a i l s . The treatment and control groups each produced an equal number of students who worked i n t h i s manner. Teacher attitudes. Teacher attitudes toward the class and towards individuals i n the class were recorded weekly i n the Teacher Logs. The attitudes, when analyzed, f e l l mainly into two categories: s a t i s f a c t i o n and d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n . Teacher s a t i s f a c t i o n was reflected i n remarks regarding the following: 1. Purposeful, industrious attitude toward the task 2. Attention and close observation 3. Completed tasks • 4. Evidence of e f f o r t and application, time required to s e t t l e to task 5. Attempts to follow directions and try new drawing techniques and strategies 6. Increase i n a b i l i t y to sustain concentration 7. Evidence of student s a t i s f a c t i o n , p a r t i c i p a t i o n and involvement 35 Teacher d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n resulted from the following types of observa-tions: 1. Frivolous, purposeless attitudes toward the task 2. Lazy or f a c i l e observations of object or model, l i t t l e e f f o r t indicated 3' Incompleted tasks 4. Wasting time or materials, slow to s e t t l e , s t a r t i n g over 5. Failure to t r y new strategies or follow directions 6. I n a b i l i t y to sustain concentration f o r increased lengths of time 7. Noise l e v e l too high f o r teacher to converse with students at normal p i t c h There were twice as many remarks indicating teacher s a t i s f a c t i o n with the treatment groups as with the control groups. Out of 127 remarks ana-lyzed f o r the no-talking classes, 72% of them indicated teacher s a t i s f a c -t i o n and 28% reflected d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n . For the t a l k i n g classes, 31% of the 143 remarks indicated teacher s a t i s f a c t i o n and 69% of them showed teacher d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n (see Table 14). Data from Drawing Evaluations At the end of each drawing session a questionnaire was given to stu-dents who were asked to evaluate themselves on the basis of (a) concepts learned, (b) s a t i s f a c t i o n and d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n with t h e i r work and (c) a b i l i t y to concentrate. Concepts learned. There was l i t t l e difference among students i n the control and treatment groups who reported that they understood the con-cepts very w e l l , f a i r l y well and not very well. The control groups, however, were unable to apply these concepts as frequently as the treatment Table 14 Recorded Frequency of Remarks Reflecting Teacher S a t i s f a c t i o n and D i s s a t i s f a c t i o n Teacher Attitude Treatment Control S a t i s f a c t i o n 91 45 D i s s a t i s f a c t i o n 36 98 Total Remarks 1?7 143 37 groups. Out of a total of 194 failures to apply concepts, the talking groups accounted for 58% of the failures (112) and the no-talking groups provided 42% of the failures (82). Failures were divided almost equally between boys and girls in both groups. Satisfaction with performance. Students were often asked on the Drawing Evaluation to indicate what they particularly liked about their drawing for that day. An answer of "nothing" was recorded as an indication of dissatisfaction. An equal number of students in the control and treatment groups replied that they liked "everything," but almost twice as many stu-dents in the control groups (29) expressed dissatisfaction with their per-formance as opposed to 15 in the treatment groups who indicated dissatis-faction with their work. Ability to concentrate. The percentage of students who said that they could concentrate 'very well was slightly higher in the treatment groups. In those groups 4l% reported that they could concentrate very well while 38% of the students in the control groups reported concentrating very well. An equal percentage' of students in a l l groups reported that they were able to concentrate fairly well while 11%-of the control groups as opposed to 8% of the treatment groups reported poor concentration. The total number of students reporting poor concentration was 83. Of this number, the control groups contributed 58% of the poor responses (47) and the treatment groups contributed 43% or 36 responses. The factors which students reported as inhibitors of concentration f e l l into the following categories (see Table 15)« 1. Talking 2. Distractions by friends or fellow students 3. Classroom noise Table 15 Incidence of Reported Factors Inhibiting Concentration Inhibiting Factors Treatment Control Talking 79 72 People Disturbances 29 10 Class Noise 22 36 Lack of Noise 12 0 Ability Frustrations 44 70 Physical Frustrations 15 39 Personal Reasons 23 _8 Total 224 235 4. Lack of noise 5. A b i l i t y frustrations 6. Physical frustrations 7. Personal reasons Talking in the classroom by peers and frustrations in drawing ab i l i t y ranked highest as factors inhibi t ing concentration in a l l groups. Talking ranked s l ight ly higher as a factor in the treatment groups (35%) than in the control groups (31%)1 while frustrat ion with a b i l i t y was highest in the control groups {30%) and lower (20%) in the treatment groups. There were 315 responses from students who reported that nothing had interferred with their concentration. Of these responses 45% belonged to the control or talking groups and 55% belonged to the treatment or no-talking groups. The treatment groups were the only ones to report lack of noise as a fac-tor inhibi t ing concentration. This factor was ci ted 1-2.-?'times or in 5% of the total responses for that group. As an indication of involvement and concentration, students were asked each week for their subjective opinions on how quickly or slowly time passed during the drawing session (see Table 16). Although the talking groups indicated more frequently that time passed quickly, the no-talking groups reported more frequently that they were unaware of time passing. A l l groups reported almost equally that time passed slowly, but the f re -quency of this response was was much lower than for the other two cate-gories. Data from Drawing Scores The Draw A Person Tests and the drawings of the l i ve models were scored at the beginning and again at the end of the study in order to gain some measure of ab i l i t y so that the groups 7could be equitably Table 16 Frequency o f Responses I n d i c a t i n g S u b j e c t i v e E v a l u a t i o n o f Time P a s s i n g -Passage of Time Treatment C o n t r o l Q u i c k l y S l o w l y Not Aware of Time P a s s i n g 83 75 134 124 68 100 41 divided, consistency of scoring procedures could be tested,, and compari-sons could be made to see what e f f e c t s , i f any, the v a r i a b l e of no t a l k i n g had on drawing s k i l l . Draw Ai Person Tests. Comparisons of mean and median scores f o r a l l classes on the f i r s t Draw.A, Person Test showed l i t t l e i n i t i a l d i f f e r e n c e i n the drawing a b i l i t y of the four classes (see Tables 17 and 18). D i v i -s ion 3 (talking) scored lowest on both DAPT, but made the greatest gain i n scores during the study. Between the f i r s t and the second DAPT there was a net mean gain of +4 f o r the t a l k i n g groups and +3 f o r the no-talking groups, but t h i s was not s u f f i c i e n t to constitute a r e a l d i f f e r e n c e between the treatment and control groups. L i v e model drawing scores. The range of scores on the l i v e model drawings was consistent with the DAPT scores and l i t t l e i n i t i a l d i f f e r e n c e was indic a t e d between classes. D i v i s i o n 3 (control) again had s l i g h t l y lower mean scores on both sets of drawings than the other classes, but had the same median scores as two of the other d i v i s i o n s . A l l classes made consistent increases i n t h e i r mean and median scores on the second drawing and there was no appreciable d i f f e r e n c e between the control and treatment groups. 42 Table 17 Comparisons of Mean Scores on Draw A Person Tests and On Li v e Model Drawings Group- DAPT #1 DAPT #2 Model I Model I I Treatment D i v i s i o n 1 D i v i s i o n 4 53 57 54 59 51 49 53 52 Control D i v i s i o n 2 55 55 50 D i v i s i o n 3 • • 49 53 45 47 43 Table 18 Comparisons of Median Scores on Draw.A. Person Tests and On Live Model Drawings Group DAPT #1 DAPT #2 Model I Model I I Treatment D i v i s i o n 1 D i v i s i o n 4 54 61 55 61 51 48 54 54 Control D i v i s i o n 2 D i v i s i o n 3 56 49 57 54 48 48 52 54 44 Chapter 4 DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS An examination of the f i n d i n g s from data obtained on the Drawing Surveys, the Teacher Logs, the Drawing Evaluations and the drawing scores w i l l be presented and f u r t h e r discussed i n t h i s section. Drawing Surveys In a d d i t i o n to f i n d i n g out more about the population under study, a comparison of the Drawing Surveys given a t the beginning and end of the ten week period provided means f o r detecting changes i n a t t i t u d e s and opinions which occurred during the study. The r e s u l t s of the comparison and the changes which occurred w i l l be discussed below. Aids i n l e a r n i n g to draw. Results i n d i c a t e d that copying and imita-t i o n were Important f a c t o r s i n drawing at t h i s age and f o r t h i s population. Students f e l t that they d i d not r e l y on d i r e c t observation of people and objects when drawing, but on copying photos and on the previously developed conventions of other people's drawings. This conforms to the Wilsons' idea (1975) that a l l c h i l d r e n l e a r n to draw objects p r i m a r i l y through i m i t a t i n g other children's drawings and by copying media representations. Thus, drawing conventions are passed from s i b l i n g s , peers and predecessors to succeeding generations. They r e j e c t Arnheim's view (1969) that drawing of objects i s based f i r s t on observation and then on invention of abstract mental equivalences. The Wilsons f e e l that imagery sources f o r high school students are a l l borrowed from other students and that there i s no new invention of v i s u a l symbols a f t e r the age of eight or nine years. The boys maintained t h e i r p o s i t i o n on copying throughout the study. The g i r l s , however, indicated that i n s t r u c t i o n and pr a c t i c e i n drawing r e a l 45 objects were more important to them at the end of the study than at the beginning. This diffe r e n c e could be caused by boys' preferences f o r draw-ing space scenes, b a t t l e scenes and guns and tanks which are not normally accessible from d i r e c t observation and which are sometimes considered i n -appropriate subjects i n school a r t programmes. G i r l s , on the other hand, preferred to draw subjects which are more often a v a i l a b l e f o r d i r e c t obser-vatio n such as people, fashion, trees and flowers. Perhaps a drawing pro-gramme f o r boys a t t h i s age should recognize t h e i r preferences f o r space age machinery and weaponry and include models of such objects to observe when drawing.: Estimated a b i l i t y i n drawing. Again, there were marked dif f e r e n c e s between the boys and g i r l s i n what they each f e l t they were able to draw best. What boys f e l t they drew best, g i r l s f e l t they drew worst, with the s i n g l e exception of cartoons. The a f f i n i t y f o r drawing cartoons was very pronounced among both boys and g i r l s . In informal dis c u s s i o n students volunteered that they l i k e d to draw cartoons because they were easy and could be made to look l i k e "the r e a l thing." Recognition was instant among t h e i r f r i e n d s and, i n the event that a cartoon was not turning out r i g h t , d i f f i c u l t parts could be traced or a f r i e n d could " f i x i t up." Students who were considered good a t drawing cartoons enjoyed a c e r t a i n prestige and were considered a r t i s t i c by t h e i r f r i e n d s . I t would be i n t e r e s t i n g to f i n d out at what age t h i s penchant f o r car-tooning begins and u n t i l what age i t l a s t s . C e r t a i n l y students i n t h i s study were searching to enlarge t h e i r r e p e r t o i r e of cartoon conventions. Because the conventions used intdrawing cartoons have already been reduced to two dimensions, students do not have to solve the problem of f i n d i n g graphic equivalents f o r three dimensional objects. Cartoons seem to s a t i s f y 4 6 the p r e - ado l e s c en t ' s d e s i r e f o r accuracy i n r e p r e s en t a t i o n wh i l e a l l o w i n g him to avo i d the more d i f f i c u l t t a sk of f i n d i n g these equivalents-. Students may t i r e o f ca r toon copy ing once they have mastered i t and be more r e l u c -t an t than ever to r e t u r n to the i n i t i a l , clumsy s tages o f l e a r n i n g to draw ob j e c t s i n three d imens iona l space. The Wi l sons (1975) f e e l t ha t when young people outgrow ch i l dhood ways o f drawing they need to be taught new convent ions which can be e l abo ra ted on and re-combined ad i n f i n i t u m . Perhaps, i n s t ead o f i g n o r i n g the p r e -ado l e s c en t ' s d e s i r e f o r r ep roduc i b l e convent ions , an a r t programme f o r s t u d e n t s - a t - t h i s age shou ld emphasize them and he lp expand the s t uden t ' s s tock o f convent ions so t ha t when he becomes bored w i t h the ca r toon image, he w i l l not f i n d h i s s t o re empty and s top drawing a l t o g e t h e r . A l though both boys and g i r l s i n d i c a t e d g r ea t e r conf idence i n the num-ber o f i tems they thought they cou ld draw w e l l by the end o f the s tudy, the d i f f e r e n c e between them and the sub j e c t s they thought they cou ld draw w e l l and draw poo r l y remained markedly c o n s i s t e n t . Boys cont inued to f e e l t h a t they drew people p oo r l y and d i d not show as much conf idence i n t h e i r average a b i l i t y to draw everyday ob j e c t s as g i r l s d i d . These d i f f e r e n c e s i n r e a l o r imagined a b i l i t y between boys and g i r l s a t t h i s age shou ld be cons idered i n any f u t u r e r e sea r ch on t h i s sub j e c t . By the end o f the study a l l o f the d i v i s i o n s had i nc reased es t imates o f t h e i r a b i l i t y to draw w e l l except D i v i s i o n 1 ( t reatment) which repo r ted a net l o s s i n es t imated a b i l i t y to draw items w e l l . Owing to a missed s e s s i o n , t h i s c l a s s was one week behind the o thers f o r the l a s t two weeks o f the s tudy . Th i s meant t h a t they were asked to complete the second Drawing Survey and to r a t e t h e i r drawing a b i l i t y a f t e r they had r e ce i v ed t h e i r r e po r t cards and had seen the t e a che r ' s es t imate of t h e i r a b i l i t y . 47 This seemed to produce a downward tendency i n t h e i r s e l f evaluations and influenced them to rate themselves "average" instead of "very good" f o r the majority of items. Awareness of a r t elements. Another notable d i f f e r e n c e between boys and g i r l s i n t h i s population i s t h e i r stated awareness of c e r t a i n elements i n drawing such as l i g h t source, tonal value, r e l a t i v e s i z e and negative space. On both surveys twice as many g i r l s as boys reported that they were very often aware of these elements. When tested on t h e i r a p p l i c a t i o n , how-ever, the boys scored as well as- the g i r l s . This may be another i n d i c a t o r of g i r l s having more confidence i n t h e i r drawing at t h i s age than boys, or i t may r e f l e c t more f a m i l i a r i t y with the terms used i n a r t parlance. A b i l i t y to form mental images. There was an increase f o r a l l d i v i s i o n s i n reported a b i l i t y to form mental images. Whether or not p r a c t i c e i n drawing d i r e c t l y from observation improves the a b i l i t y to form mental images has not been established and deserves f u r t h e r study. A l l of the boys who sa i d they could not form a mental image had previously been i d e n t i f i e d a t the school as having l e a r n i n g d i s a b i l i t i e s r e l a t e d to short-term v i s u a l memory. These students often had trouble sustaining concentration during the drawing session. The two students i n the control groups with t h i s problem talked c o n s i s t e n t l y and seldom f i n i s h e d a drawing,- while the student i n the treatment group was able to f i n i s h s i x out of eight drawings. None of them was able to draw a b i c y c l e from memory. Both boys and g i r l s reported equal increases i n a b i l i t y to form c l e a r mental images. I t would be i n t e r e s t i n g to note f o r future research on imaging whether there are more- boys than g i r l s with short-term' memory l e a r n i n g d i s a b i l i t i e s i n the school population at large as was the case i n t h i s study population. 48 Importance of practice. The number of students who, by the end of the study, f e l t that practice was very important in learning to draw had doubled. The i n i t i a l attitude might have reflected the prevalent practice i n art pro-grammes to stress a broad range of art act i v i t i e s over depth of experience in any one of them. Students cannot learn the value of practice i f teachers themselves present classes with new art a c t i v i t i e s each week. There were several times during the l a t t e r part of the study when I f e l t the students were getting tired of drawing. Although this was probably the case at times, when asked which lessons they preferred, students reported as many preferences for lessons late i n the study as for lessons earlier on. This indicated a tolerance or resistance to fatigue which i s not always obvious to the teacher conducting an in-depth programme. Importance of concentration. A l l classes placed higher importance on the necessity to concentrate i n learning to draw at the end of the study than they had i n the beginning. The fact that only 30% of the students f i r s t f e l t that concentration was very important reflects an attitude to-ward art and i t s content that should be of concern to art educators. I f paucity of early training has f a i l e d to make students aware of the need for either practice or concentration in the art process, i t i s not surprising that so many choose to neglect the pursuit when they leave elementary school. Discouragement in drawing. The control or talking groups had 33% more students than the treatment or no-talking groups who reported being often discouraged with their drawing by the end of the study. They also indi-cated 50% more dissatisfaction with their work on the weekly Drawing Evalua-tions. The obvious disparity between the treatment and control groups may reasonably be seen as a function of the control variable. Whenever a student in the no-talking groups indicated discouragement by signaling for help, he 49 was q u i e t l y asked to t r y to f i n d ways to solve h i s own v i s u a l problems. When students i n the t a l k i n g groups became discouraged, they often j u s t gave up, s t a r t e d over or began t a l k i n g to f r i e n d s . The incidence of erasing and s t a r t i n g over was much greater f o r the c o n t r o l classes. Students who per-severed and t r i e d to solve t h e i r own problems without r e s o r t i n g to peer d i s t r a c t i o n seemed to respond with a greater degree of s a t i s f a c t i o n with t h e i r drawing and to have become l e s s discouraged than those who gave up e a s i l y and talked to t h e i r neighbours. Teacher Logs and Observations Results of data gathered i n the Teacher Logs and observations showed several apparent d i f f e r e n c e s between the control and treatment groups. These di f f e r e n c e s appeared i n regard to (a) t a l k i n g and not drawing, (b) t a l k i n g and drawing, (c) f o l l o w i n g d i r e c t i o n s , (d) references to model, (e) complete and incomplete drawings, ( f ) second s t a r t s , (g) d i f f e r i n g approaches and (h) teacher a t t i t u d e s . Talking and not drawing. In the majority of observations, when students began t a l k i n g , they stopped drawing. Notations i n the Teacher Logs and videotape evidence c o n s i s t e n t l y confirmed t h i s observation. Conversely, when students stopped t a l k i n g , they most often began drawing again. The Logs record frequent surprise a t how qu i c k l y and q u i e t l y the co n t r o l classes s e t t l e d down to work on a drawing task i n v o l v i n g d i r e c t observation even without being asked not to talk. The moment that everyone began to draw, there was s i l e n c e i n the room. There were p o t e n t i a l " t a l k e r s " i n each c l a s s . These were students who would rather s o c i a l i z e than draw. In the treatment groups, these students would f i d g e t and t r y to draw t h e i r neighbour's a t t e n t i o n to them i n some way, but because of the s t r i c t u r e against t a l k i n g , t h e i r neighbours were 50 reluctant to lie drawn into a conversation. Because there was no such stric-ture in the control classes, the "talkers" could usually manage to involve two or three others at" their table in- conversation, which eventually weakened the concentration for the entire table and often spread to other tables in the classroom. Almost every time other students became involved in the conversation, their pencils stopped recording marks on their papers. "Talkers" in the control classes had a high incidence of crumpled papers and second starts. They became easily discouraged with their work and would stop drawing and-begin conversing instead of trying to solve their problems. This- "discouragement/talking" syndrome produced some interesting and fairly consistent behaviours. The student would fi r s t signal his discouragement (with a sigh, slump or exasperated motion of his eraser) and then begin to try to involve those around him in a conversation. At the end of the con-versation when the others had gone back to their drawings, he would look at the drawings in progress around him, crumple his paper ostentatiously, get a new one and begin a new conversation before settling to the drawing task once again. These delaying tactics, when repeated a few times in an art lesson left l i t t l e time for actual practice, and seemed to reinforce the student's dissatisfaction with his performance. There were far fewer clean sheet start overs in the treatment groups. Those who did begin again, usually turned their papers over and began again without involving others in their decision, thus losing l i t t l e actual drawing practice. Several times during the study when I attempted to make demonstration drawings from direct observation on the blackboard and talk at the same time, I was aware of the difficulty of' talking, observing and drawing at the same time. Whenever I decided to emphasize the verbal instructions, the drawing became slightly incoherent and whenever I chose to concentrate on the drawing, 2-the verbal commentary became somewhat d i s j o i n t e d . The d i f f i c u l t y of t a l k i n g and drawing from observation at the same time seems to indicate some i n t e r -ference between the two operations. The implications of t h i s possible i n t e r -ference should be examined by a r t educators interested i n teaching drawing s k i l l s at every age. Talking and drawing. R e l a t i v e l y few observations were made of students who were t a l k i n g and drawing at the same time, and these seemed more r e l a t e d to the type of a c t i v i t y than to the f u n c t i o n of the v a r i a b l e . . A c t i v i t i e s such as colouring i n negative spaces and drawing a b i c y c l e from memory which did not require s t r i c t observation of a model seemed to encourage more t a l k -ing while drawing. Students who d i d t a l k and draw at the same time tended to use r e p e t i t i v e , random, "doodling" marks on t h e i r papers. They dotted f r e c k l e s , dashed repeated b i c y c l e spokes, coloured i n s o l i d dark areas, or made random l i n e s i n d i c a t i n g h a i r testure. In several of the b i c y c l e drawings, students marked randomly while t a l k i n g , then stopped t a l k i n g , looked at t h e i r papers and erased the whole se c t i o n -Tthey had completed while t a l k i n g . The incidence of erasing on the memory b i c y c l e was much higher f o r those students who talked and t r i e d to draw at the same time. The memory drawing of the b i c y c l e was the one a c t i v i t y of the whole study where the co n t r o l classes never completely s e t t l e d q u i e t l y to task. There was always some murmuring, although, at f i r s t , i t seemed to take the form of communal e f f o r t s to r e c a l l c e r t a i n d e t a i l s , of b i c y c l e s . There was a tendency f o r students i n the control groups who could.not'remember d e t a i l s to give up and begin t a l k i n g to f r i e n d s about unrelated subjects. This was i n sharp contrast to the treatment classes which s e t t l e d to work immediately and q u i e t l y . They also had trouble remembering d e t a i l s , but showed obvious e f f o r t s to r e c a l l them by c a s t i n g t h e i r eyes upward, rubbing foreheads and 52 c l o s i n g t h e i r eyes i n thought. The amount of mental e f f o r t put f o r t h by the treatment groups i n contrast to the co n t r o l groups suggests that t a l k i n g may i n t e r f e r e even more with the formation of mental images than with draw-ing from d i r e c t observation. Following d i r e c t i o n s . Students who talked during c l a s s were l e s s l i k e l y to follow d i r e c t i o n s than students who d i d not. They would often begin the lesson by f o l l o w i n g d i r e c t i o n s , but by the second or t h i r d scan would have forgotten to keep t h e i r pen on the paper or t h e i r eye on the model while they drew and would have lapsed into older, f a m i l i a r ways of drawing. The students, by t h i s age, i t seems had developed t h e i r own ways of drawing things and were re l u c t a n t to t r y new approaches and s t r a t e g i e s . Some of them commented that t h e i r drawings would be ruined i f they followed a new strategy. They complained that i f they followed d i r e c t i o n s , t h e i r p i c t u r e s would not look as good' as those of students who were not following d i r e c t i o n s . In order to expose pre-adolescents to new drawing s t r a t e g i e s , i t seems necessary to f i r s t persuade them to abandon t h e i r p r e - e x i s t i n g approaches and conventions i n order to t r y out new ones. I f the a c q u i s i t i o n of new s t r a t e g i e s i s hampered by f a i l u r e to follow d i r e c t i o n s when students are allowed to t a l k , then the r e l a t i o n s h i p between t a l k i n g and f o l l o w i n g d i r e c -tions deserves f u r t h e r examination by a r t educators and drawing i n s t r u c t o r s . References to the model and the object. The co n t r o l groups r e f e r r e d l e s s often to the model or the object than the treatment groups. A l l classes r e f e r r e d with approximately the same frequency during the f i r s t scan, but then the t a l k i n g groups f e l l o f f sharply i n the frequency of t h e i r referen-ces. In general, observation decreased as t a l k i n g increased, and with that increase came more frequent erasures. Students who began drawing again 53 a f t e r a period of conversation would often "begin drawing without a pre-lim i n a r y reference to the model or the object. A f t e r a few seconds of drawing, they would look at the model and then erase what they had just drawn. The increased erasing presumably res u l t e d from a comparison between the image on paper and the r e a l object which the students found lacki n g . The more f a m i l i a r the object, the fewer observations were made. In the f i r s t l i v e model drawing, 80% of the students i n a l l classes stopped r e -f e r r i n g to the model when drawing d e t a i l s on the h a i r and clothes. References to u n f a m i l i a r objects such as the up-side down man, junk objects and bones continued, i n general, u n t i l completion of the drawing. The seeming f a c t that u n f a m i l i a r i t y i n s p i r e d greater observation may be a r e s u l t of students' having fewer pre-conceived drawing conventions to f a l l back on. I t may also r e s u l t from having fewer verbal d e s c r i p t o r s to r e l y on thereby f o r c i n g students to gather more v i s u a l information. Complete and incomplete drawings. The most evident diff e r e n c e between the treatment and co n t r o l groups was i n terms of production. When t a l k i n g time was subtracted from drawing time, the co n t r o l groups f i n i s h e d f a r fewer pict u r e s than the treatment groups and received demonstrably l e s s p r a c t i c e . The number of completed drawings appeared d i r e c t l y r e l a t e d to the length of time students spent on t h e i r work. Some students spent only seven or eight minutes a c t u a l l y drawing during a 20 minute session. The treatment groups improved t h e i r a b i l i t y to s u s t a i n longer periods of concentration each week u n t i l both classes could draw with deep a t t e n t i o n f o r 20 minutes at a time without showing signs of restlessness. Restlessness and general t a l k i n g would u s u a l l y occur i n the control classes within eight to ten minutes. Many students i n the no-talking groups increased t h e i r p r a c t i c e time by returning to t h e i r drawings and working u n t i l the b e l l 54 a f t e r completing the Drawing Evaluation at the end of each session. No students i n the control classes returned to t h e i r drawings a f t e r completing the questionnaire despite having v"drawingsacknowledged to he incomplete. Although these classes spent an average of two minutes l e s s per c l a s s f i l l i n g out the Evaluation questionnaire than the treatment classes, they always spent the remaining time before the b e l l chatting together. D i f f e r i n g approaches. Students were tenacious i n maintaining conven-t i o n a l , sequential approaches to drawing. The majority of them proceeded to b u i l d the whole drawing through a s e r i e s of steps, completing each d e t a i l before going on to the next. Most students s t a r t e d a t the top i n a f i g u r e drawing (although 8 out of 1 0 2 preferred to begin with the feet) and drew objects from l e f t • t o : r i g t i t unless they were l e f t handed. They had trouble i n sessions where they were asked to use large gestures or to make a global plan of t h e i r e n t i r e drawing before going back and completing the d e t a i l s . This might have been caused by the emphasis on contour and the build-up of form by l i n e i n the previous exercises. I t seemed as i f students at t h i s age had l e s s d i f f i c u l t y understanding part to part r e l a t i o n s h i p s than they d i d comprehending the r e l a t i o n s h i p s of parts to wholes. Teacher a t t i t u d e s . Although I have seldom had more uniformly s a t i s -f y i n g classes of youngsters to teach, d i s t i n c t d i f f e r e n c e s i n my a t t i t u d e towards the two groups showed up i n the Teacher Logs. I was c o n t i n u a l l y surprised at how quickly and how q u i e t l y the control classes s e t t l e d to task without being asked not to t a l k and at how d i f f i c u l t i t was to main-t a i n the "no-talking" s t r i c t u r e with the treatment classes while, at the same time, keeping an open, f r i e n d l y atmosphere i n the classroom. This became e a s i e r as the weeks passed and, i n the end, the business-like atmos-phere that p r e v a i l e d i n the treatment classes was more s a t i s f y i n g than the 55 open, relaxed atmosphere of the control classes. I found that, although I was frequently pleased at the beginning of a control c l a s s with how qu i c k l y i t s e t t l e d down to work, I was often disap-pointed by the end of the class- with the r e s u l t s of the drawings. I always hated to see the momentum of a good beginning l o s t as the t a l k i n g increased and the q u a l i t y and production diminished. I could often see a purposeful, industrious a t t i t u d e toward work erode as the amount of t a l k i n g increased. The students who talked most seemed to put l e a s t e f f o r t i n t o t h e i r work. I t r i e d to encourage them to work by taking an i n t e r e s t i n what they were doing, but was f r u s t r a t e d by the f e e l i n g that they would do better i f I asked them not to t a l k . Although a l l classes showed an improvement i n the frequency of object reference during the study, I was discouraged by the way the control groups c o n s i s t e n t l y lagged behind the treatment groups i n number of observations per class.. Some students i n the t a l k i n g classes would even s i t with t h e i r backs to the model or object while they drew so they could be c l o s e r to a f r i e n d . When i n s t r u c t i o n s were given a t the beginning of a c l a s s to move desks to get the best possible view of a model or object, there was general movement and r e - p o s i t i o n i n g i n the treatment classes while the co n t r o l classes hardly moved at a l l . Some i n d i v i d u a l s i n each c l a s s worked hard and produced very s a t i s f y i n g drawings, but the number of incomplete drawings each week was disappointing because i t was a direct', r e s u l t of wasting time. The amount of erasing and clean sheet second s t a r t s was annoying because i t wasted time and * materials. Another source of d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n with the co n t r o l groups came from t h e i r reluctance to t r y new s t r a t e g i e s or to follow d i r e c t i o n s c o n s i s t e n t l y , 56 which made i t d i f f i c u l t f o r me to help them expand t h e i r drawing experience. As some members of a table group lapsed into o l d ways of drawing, they tended to influence others around them. As they talked more and observed l e s s they seemed to r e f e r to each other's drawings f o r confirmation instead of to the model. The treatment groups, on the other hand, d i d not seem to be as influenced by peers. When one member of a table group reverted to a previously learned approach, there was l i t t l e evidence that others at the table were influenced by i t . Peer influence was also a major f a c t o r i n the d i f f e r e n c e between the lengths of time each group could s u s t a i n concentration. I n d i v i d u a l s i n the no-talking groups who had short a t t e n t i o n spans would sometimes stop drawing, look out of the window, f i d g e t and then return to the drawing whereas i n d i -v i d u a l s with short a t t e n t i o n spans i n the t a l k i n g groups would u s u a l l y en-gage one or more members of t h e i r table i n conversation or interplay. Length of sustained concentration f o r the e n t i r e c o n t r o l group was, therefore, l a r g e l y determined by the i n d i v i d u a l s with the shortest a t t e n t i o n spans. With the exception of the "no-talking while drawing" r u l e f o r the '. j treatment groups, the same d i s c i p l i n a r y r u l e s were i n e f f e c t f o r a l l classes and the noise l e v e l i n the c o n t r o l groups was kept to an acceptable l e v e l at a l l times. However, even when students began t a l k i n g i n low tones, i t was often d i f f i c u l t f o r the teacher to converse with i n d i v i d u a l s i n a normal tone of voice. Teacher discouragement u s u a l l y rose with the amount of general t a l k i n g because i t meant students, were detached from the a c t i v i t y and not drawing. Drawing Evaluations The w i l l i n g n e s s with which a l l classes f i l l e d i n the Drawing Evaluation questionnaire at the end of each session was g r a t i f y i n g . The students 57 u s u a l l y completed the form q u i e t l y and independently and seemed happy to give t h e i r opinions and r e f l e c t on the day's session. Although the t r e a t -ment groups sometimes spent two or three minutes longer f i l l i n g i t out, the q u a l i t y of the answers was about the same f o r a l l classes. A discussion follows of r e s u l t s from the Drawing Evaluation. Findings about (a) concepts learned, (b) s a t i s f a c t i o n with performance and (c) a b i l i t y to concentrate are included. Concepts learned. There was a discrepancy between the concepts that boys and g i r l s s a i d they were often aware of and t h e i r a b i l i t y to apply them. G i r l s reported being often aware of elements such as sources of l i g h t , negative space, s i z e r e l a t i o n s h i p s and tonal values almost twice as frequently as boys. However, when asked to demonstrate the'; concepts i n -volved, boys and g i r l s scored equally. This suggests that the responses on the Drawing Evaluations were subjective measures only and d i d not necessarily r e l a t e to objective c r i t e r i a . S a t i s f a c t i o n with performance. Most of the students indicated s a t i s -f a c t i o n with the drawings they produced. A l l f i n i s h e d drawings were mounted and displayed i n the main h a l l of the school each week and the students were pleased with the amount of commendation they received from parents, teachers, and f r i e n d s . The d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n that d i d occur, however, was nearly twnce as great f o r students i n the c o n t r o l groups. These d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n s seemed to stem from two sources: (a) from e f f o r t s deemed unsuccessful and (b) from incomplete work r e s u l t i n g from too l i t t l e e f f o r t . Students i n the treatment groups who were d i s s a t i s f i e d were u s u a l l y unhappy with the way they handled an u n f a m i l i a r technique. A b i l i t y to concentrate. Subjective estimates of a b i l i t y to concen-t r a t e v a r i e d greatly. Talkers often reported that they had concentrated 58 very w e l l , while other students who had worked q u i e t l y and intensely reported only average concentration. Each group seemed to set t h e i r standards f o r f a c t o r s which i n h i b i t e d concentration i n the context of t h e i r own c l a s s s e t t i n g . The treatment classes which were, on the whole, very q u i e t during the e n t i r e study, seemed to be bothered by t a l k i n g even more than the con-t r o l classes i n which t a l k i n g was a f a i r l y normal occurrence. S l i g h t e r classroom noises such as r a d i a t o r s clanking and sounds of erasing were men-tioned by the treatment groups as i n h i b i t i n g f a c t o r s while grosser sounds such as chairs f a l l i n g and b e l l s r i n g i n g were mentioned more frequently by the c o n t r o l groups. The c o n t r o l c l a s s e s were bothered by f r u s t r a t i o n s of a b i l i t y and phy-s i c a l surroundings more frequently than the treatment groups. This may have been because they tended to give up e a s i e r when faced with technical problems and d i d not always take time a t the beginning of the period to arrange them-.selves p h y s i c a l l y i n a good vantage point from which to view the model, es-p e c i a l l y i f that meant moving away from a f r i e n d . There was no r e a l d i f f e r e n c e between treatment and control groups i n t h e i r subjective report of time passing. The item was included as an addi-t i o n a l i n d i c a t o r of concentration and involvement. The number of students who reported poor concentration d i d not c o r r e l a t e i n any way with the num-ber of students who reported time passed slowly. This seems to indicate that "time passing" was not a u s e f u l i n d i c a t o r with which to c o r r e l a t e a b i l i t y to'concentrate. Drawing Scores Four complete sets of drawings were scored. The scores, on both Draw A' Person Tests were compared f o r a l l groups as were the scores on both l i v e model drawings i n order to see what d i f f e r e n c e s existed among the classes 59 and to see what e f f e c t , i f any, the v a r i a b l e had i n the a c q u i s i t i o n of higher drawing scores. Draw A, Person Test scores. The Goodenough-Harris DraWiJUPerson Test, f i r s t designed by Goodenough i n 1926 to measure conceptual maturity i n c h i l -dren, and then r e v i s e d by H a r r i s i n l'96l, i s the most highly standardized drawing t e s t a v a i l a b l e . Although i t can be used from ages four to f i f t e e n , i t becomes l e s s d i s c r i m i n a t i n g a t the upper end of the age scale ( H a r r i s , 196l), and was only marginally u s e f u l i n measuring drawing a b i l i t y of the students i n t h i s study. The t e s t , which gives students the choice of draw-ing a man or a woman, was modified f o r use i n the study by adding four items to the woman's point scale and two to the men's point scale i n order to have an equal number of t o t a l points f o r each sex (see Appendix C ) . D i f f e r e n t c r i t e r i a were used to score the drawings of men and women which made i t d i f f i c u l t to compare boys:'- and girls';'' scores. Drawings of women scored points i f they had "feminine-type shoes," "cosmetic l i p s , " "cheeks," " s k i r t s " and "jewelry," while drawings of men were c r e d i t e d f o r showing "four a r t i c l e s of c l o t h i n g . " Many of the g i r l s who drew women dressed them i n today's unisex s t y l e s without benefit of cosmetic l i p s , femine shoes or jewelry and were penalized points. Finer discriminations w i t h i n items would have been more h e l p f u l i n determining r e a l d ifferences between the drawings of i n d i v i d u a l s . For i n -stance, no d i s t i n c t i o n s were made between stereotyped symbols f o r noses and attempts a t r e a l i s t i c p o r t r a y a l . Any nose with an upright stroke longer than the base l i n e received c r e d i t . Men d i d not have to have n o s t r i l s to score, but women did. Men received c r e d i t f o r arm and l e g movement while women d i d not. Despite these apparent biases, and because there was' a f a i r l y equal number of boys and g i r l s i n each c l a s s who tended to draw persons of the 60 sex as themselves, there was only a twelve point spread between the lowest and the highest median c l a s s score on the f i r s t t e s t and a seven point spread between them on the- second t e s t which indicated a f a i r l y homogeneous a b i l i t y range f o r a l l of the classes. The d i f f e r e n c e i n scoring c r i t e r i a f o r boys and g i r l s d i d , however, i n v a l i d a t e any comparisons of a b i l i t y that might have been made between sexes. The v a r i a b l e d i d not seem to a f f e c t the scores i n any way as three classes made uniform increases and one c l a s s retained the same score on the second t e s t . In general, the gains i n scores were accrued by students who used some shading and more d e f i n i t e types of footwear on the second t e s t . The increases, therefore, d i d not seem to be a r e s u l t of the variable,; t a l k i n g . Many of the second drawings looked almost exactly l i k e the f i r s t ones suggesting a tendency to reproduce stock f i g u r e s on drawings from memory rather than to invent new ones. In one case, the Draw A Person memory drawing and the l i v e model drawing showed the same clothes and features thereby r e v e a l i n g an unusual reluctance to incorporate new v i s u a l informa-t i o n into previously developed schema or convention. L i v e model scores. I t might have been expected that with the treatment groups' completing a greater number of drawings, making more frequent ob-servations and f e e l i n g greater s a t i s f a c t i o n with t h e i r drawings that they would outscore the control group on the second l i v e model drawing. This was not the case. A l l classes scored be t t e r on the second model drawing i n d i c a t i n g an o v e r a l l increase i n a b i l i t y , but there was no major d i f f e r -ence between the treatment and the c o n t r o l groups. This might have occurred because (a) the scoring was not d i s c r i m i n a t i n g enough to pick up subtle d i f f e r e n c e s i n q u a l i t y , (b) the study was too short to s o l i d i f y s k i l l s and a b i l i t y , (c) the majority of the i n s t r u c t i o n a l a c t i v i t i e s were con-cerned with drawing objects instead of people, (d) students have 61 pre-conceived- notions of how to draw people and r e l y more on e x i s t i n g con-ventions than on f r e s h observations or (e) because few of the boys a t t h i s age reported they l i k e d to draw people and f e l t they d i d so poorly. Of the reasons l i s t e d above, d e f i c i e n c y i n the scoring instrument and shortness of the study were probably the most pertinent. The drawings of the second l i v e model were l a r g e r and l o o s e r than they had been the f i r s t time. Although students were instruc t e d to f i t the whole f i g u r e on the page, several of them ran o f f the page and were, therefore, penalized points. Whereas drawing scores may provide a semblance of o b j e c t i v i t y i n a drawing study, they cannot take into account subtle q u a l i t i e s of l i n e or p o s i t i v e and negative s p a t i a l r e l a t i o n s h i p s which were stressed i n the i n s t r u c t i o n during the study. Scores were not, therefore, an altogether s a t i s f a c t o r y measure of s k i l l s acquired. The short duration of the study may have been another major f a c t o r i n the f a i l u r e of the t e s t drawings to reveal greater d i f f e r e n c e s between groups. Because most o f the i n s t r u c t i o n a l a c t i v i t i e s had been structured around the observation and drawing of objects instead of people, students' scores may have simply r e f l e c t e d i n s u f f i c i e n t ' p r a c t i c e i n drawing people. 62 Chapter 5 CONCLUSIONS This study examined the variable of talking in the classroom among grade seven peers as' a factor in the acquisition of drawing skills. Data gathered from drawing test scores, teacher observations, student evaluations and drawing surveys indicate that talking among peers in the classroom may inhibit the process of visual thinking and retard the acquisition of speci-f i c concepts and drawing skills. The proposition that talking in the classroom among pre-adolescent peers inhibits acquisition of representational drawing s k i l l was reasonably, but not conclusively, examined through analysis of drawing test scores. Although a clear difference between the control and treatment groups' ability to demonstrate specific art concepts at the end of a drawing session was demonstrated, this difference was not reflected in the results of the test scores. The usefulness of standardized tests of drawing people as a re-liable measure of acquisition of s k i l l is, thereby, called into question. The test scores are determined by the number of drawing conventions the student includes and, while these may indicate maturity and intelligence, they do not necessarily reflect qualitative aspects of the drawing. Be-cause most grade seven students are familiar with the conventions used in drawing people, their scores tend to accumulate at the upper end of the scoring scale which limits the range of possible improvement. Test scores, were, however, useful in comparing populations and in determining a degree of equality between treatment and control groups. The most striking indication that talking among grade seven peers inhibits visual modes of thinking was the consistent observation that 63 students of t h i s age do not t a l k and draw i n a purposeful manner a t the same time. When they, do t a l k and draw simultaneously, they use random, mechanical s t r o k e s which they o f t e n erase l a t e r . Students who t a l k and draw i n t e r m i t t e n t l y are l e s s l i k e l y to make frequent reference to a model, achieve s a t i s f a c t i o n w i t h t h e i r work, f o l l o w d i r e c t i o n s o r t r y new tech-niques than are students who s u s t a i n t h e i r drawing without i n t e r v e n i n g con-v e r s a t i o n . Students who chat complete fewer drawings and, t h e r e f o r e , r e c e i v e l e s s p r a c t i c e than students who do not. A l s o o f importance to a r t teachers i s the e f f e c t on teacher a t t i t u d e s and s a t i s f a c t i o n s o f students' t a l k i n g . T a l k i n g students are seen to be wasting time* producing below p o t e n t i a l and to be having a h i g h e r incidence of erasures and second s t a r t s . Teacher d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n r e s u l t s from having to assess incomplete work and having;J to r a i s e v o i c e l e v e l i n order to address the c l a s s o r t a l k to i n d i v i d u a l s . Adolescence i s an e s p e c i a l l y peer conscious stage. Students a t t h i s age do not e a s i l y ignore the i n v i t a t i o n of a f r i e n d to s o c i a l i z e and yet, the evidence presented here suggests t h a t they seemingly cannot draw from a model o r an o b j e c t and t a l k a t the same time. Nor can they s u c c e s s f u l l y draw and t a l k i n t e r m i t t e n t l y without f o r g e t t i n g to r e f e r to the model o r f o l l o w d i r e c t i o n s . Perhaps because o f warnings- e a r l i e r i n the century about the dangers of i n t e r f e r i n g w i t h c h i l d r e n ' s n a t u r a l a r t i s t i c development and the more recent emphasis on a f f e c t i v e l e a r n i n g and v i s u a l t h i n k i n g , some confusion e x i s t s ' among teachers as to how much guidance should be given to c h i l d r e n and adolescents i n an a r t programme. This confusion has l e d to the mis-conception t h a t students w i l l develop- a r t i s t i c a l l y i f they are simply sup-p l i e d w i t h m a t e r i a l s and t h o u g h t f u l s u b j e c t matter. Teachers are o f t e n 64 l o a t h e to impose i n s t r u c t i o n o r s o c i a l r e s t r i c t i o n s i n the a r t room f o r f e a r of damaging c r e a t i v i t y o r s p o i l i n g the a f f e c t i v e b e n e f i t s of a r t . Although they may r e a l i z e t h a t s a t i s f a c t i o n i n a r t , as i n any d i s c i p l i n e , ensues from c o n c e n t r a t i o n , p r a c t i c e and progressive development of s k i l l s , they may l a c k the r a t i o n a l e to i n s i s t on a predominantly non-verbal environment i n the a r t room. E i s n e r (l9?2) s t r e s s e s the importance of s k i l l development as the key to u n l o c k i n g a r t i s t i c e x pression and advocates in-depth a r t programmes which emphasize p r a c t i c e and development of a r t techniques. Without s k i l l -f u l technique, he warns, c h i l d r e n ' s v i s u a l thoughts and images w i l l remain undeveloped or w i l l f i n d e x p r e s s i o n i n other, more competent modes. I f , as the l i m i t e d scope o f t h i s study suggests, v i s u a l processes are i n h i b i t e d by v e r b a l i n t e r f e r e n c e and i f , a c q u i s i t i o n of some types of draw-i n g s k i l l s are r e t a r d e d by extraneous t a l k i n g i n the a r t room, then-a.modest r a t i o n a l e may be provided f o r teachers who wish to l i m i t v e r b a l exchange i n the a r t room i n order to promote f u r t h e r development i n drawing s k i l l . Drawing d i r e c t l y from o b s e r v a t i o n has been presented i n t h i s study as an important element i n the e x e r c i s e of v i s u a l t h i n k i n g . While l i t t l e em-p i r i c a l j u s t i f i c a t i o n has been presented by w r i t e r s i n the f i e l d o f a r t education to show t h a t extraneous c h a t t e r improves drawing s k i l l o r en-hances v i s u a l t h i n k i n g , evidence has been o f f e r e d here which i n d i c a t e s t h a t such t a l k i n g i n h i b i t s the process o f v i s u a l t h i n k i n g i n the drawing process. I t a l s o i n t e r f e r e s w i t h accumulation of drawing p r a c t i c e and, a c c o r d i n g to p u p i l s ' comments, r e s u l t s i n diminished- s a t i s f a c t i o n w i t h performance. Although the f i n d i n g s i n t h i s study are modest and based on a s m a l l -s c a l e , they are nevertheless a c o n t r i b u t i o n to what i d e a l i s t i c a l l y should be a widening data-base. S e v e r a l questions regarding the r e l a t i o n s h i p 65 between verbal and v i s u a l thinking remain to be examined. This i n v e s t i g a t o r recommends that f u r t h e r study be undertaken to determine: 1. The possible e f f e c t s of a non-verbal environment f o r d i f f e r e n t types of drawing a c t i v i t i e s . 2. The p o s s i b i l i t y " of students l e a r n i n g to s h i f t consciously from verbal to v i s u a l modes of thinking. 3 . The r e l a t i o n s h i p s between drawing and t a l k i n g at d i f f e r e n t age l e v e l s ranging from elementary to secondary school. k. The p r a c t i c e of drawing cartoon conventions a t d i f f e r e n t age l e v e l s . 66 References Ayrton, M. The act of drawing. London: Methuen & Co. , Ltd., 1957. Edwards, B. Drawing on the r i g h t side of the "brain. Los Angeles: J. P. Tarcher, Inc., 1979. Eisner, E. Educating a r t i s t i c v i s i o n . New York: Macmillan Publishing Co., Inc., 1972. Goodenough, F. Measurement of intelligence by drawings. New York: Harcourt, Brace and World, 1926. Greenberg, P. A r t and ideas f o r young people. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold Co., 1970. Guilford, J. The nature of human int e l l i g e n c e . New York: McGraw-Hill, Inc.', 1967. Harris, D. Children's drawings as a measure of i n t e l l e c t u a l maturity. New York: Harcourt, Brace and World, 1963. H i l l , E. The language of drawing. Englewood C l i f f s , N. J.: Prentice-H a l l , Inc., 1966. Linderman, E., & Herberholz, D. Developing a r t i s t i c and perceptual aware-ness. New York: Wm. C. Brown, Co., Publishers, 1974. Maslow, A. Emotional blocks to ..creativity. In S. Parnes and H. Harding (Eds.), A source" book f o r creative thinking. New York: Scribner's, 1971. May, R. In McMullan, W., Creative individuals: paradoxical personages. Creative Behavior, 1976, 10 (4). McKim, R. Experiences i n v i s u a l thinking. Monterey, C a l i f o r n i a : Brooks-Cole Publishing Co. , 1972. Muholland, T. A program f o r the EEG study of attention i n v i s u a l communi-cation. In Randhawa & Coffman (Eds.), Visual learning, thinking and  communication. New York: Academic Press, 1978. McMullan, W. Creative individuals: paradoxical personages. Journal of  Creative Behavior, 1976, 10 (4). Nicolaides, K. The natural way to draw. New York: Houghton M i f f l i n , 194l. Ornstein, R. The psychology of consciousness. New York: Viking Press, 1972. Pavio, A. On exploring v i s u a l knowledge. In Randhawa & Coffman (Eds.), Visual learning, thinking and communication. New York: Academic Press, 1978. 67 Randhawa, B. V i s u a l t r i n i t y : an overview. I n Randhawa & Goffman (Eds.), V i s u a l l e a r n i n g , t h i n k i n g and communication. New York: Academic P r e s s , 1978. Samples, B. The metaphoric mind. Reading, Mass.r Addison-Wesley P u b l i s h -i n g Co., 1976. Schwartz, G., Davidson, R., & Pugash, E. Voluntary c o n t r o l of p a t t e r n s o f EEG asymmetry: c o g n i t i v e components. Psychophysiology, 1976, 13, 498-504. Simmons I I I , S., & Winer, M. Drawing, the c r e a t i v e process. Englewood C l i f f s , New Jersey: P r e n t i c e - H a l l , I nc., 1977. Wachowiak, F., & Ramsay, T. Emphasis: a r t . Scranton, Pennsylvania: I n t e x t E d u c a t i o n a l P u b l i s h e r s , 1971. Wilson, B., & Wilson, M. An i c o n o c l a s t i c view o f imagery sources i n the drawings o f young people. S•tud-jes^ln-Avrt^Education; • 1977. 68 Bibliography Arnheim, R. Vi s u a l thinking. Berkeley: U n i v e r s i t y of C a l i f o r n i a Press, 1969. Ayrton, M. The act of drawing. In Golden.sections.. London: Methuen and Co., Ltd., 1957. B e i t t e l , K. Mind and context i n the a r t of drawing. New York: Holt Rinehart and Winston, Inc., 1972. Berger, A. A program f o r the EEG study of a t t e n t i o n i n v i s u a l communica-t i o n . In Randhawa Coffman (Eds.), V i s u a l learning, thinking and  communication. New York: Academic Press, 1978. Bode, B. The concept of needs i n education. Progressive Education, 1938, 15 (1), 9. Broudy, H. Mastery. In B. Smith &R. • Ennis (Eds.), Language and concepts  i n education. Chicago: Rand McNally, 196l. Buhler, K. The mental development of the c h i l d . London: Routlege and Kegan Paul, Ltd., 1930. Chapman, L. Approaches to a r t i n education. New York: Harcourt Brace, 1978. De.'"Bono, E. L a t e r a l thinking: c r e a t i v i t y step by step. New York: Harper and Row, 1970. Dewey, J . A r t as experience. New York: Minton, Balch and Co., 1939. Dorethy, R., & Reeves, D. Mental functioning, perceptual d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n , p e r s o n a l i t y and achievement among a r t and non-art majors. Studies i n A r t Education, 1979, 20 (2). Dreeben, R. On what i s learned i n school. Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley Publishing Co., 196*8. Edwards, B. Drawing on the r i g h t side of the brain. Los Angeles: J. P. Tarcher, Inc., 1979. Eisner, E. Educating a r t i s t i c v i s i o n . New York: MacMillan P u b l i s h i n g Co., Inc., 1972. Eisner, E. The educational imagination. New York: MacMillan Publishing Co., Inc., 1979. Gardner, H. Children's s e n s i t i v i t y to musical s t y l e s . Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 1973, 19, 67-77. Goldstein, N..: The a r t df responsive drawing. Englewood C l i f f s , N. J . : Pr e n t i c e - H a l l , 1973. 69 Goodenough, F. Measurement of i n t e l l i g e n c e by drawings. New York: Har-court, Brace and World, 1S2.G. Greenberg, P. Children's experiences i n a r t . New York: Reinhold Publish-ing, Corp., i 9 6 0 ! Greenberg, P.' A r t ideas f o r young people. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold, Co., 1970. G u i l f o r d , J. The nature o f human i n t e l l i g e n c e . New York: McGraw-Hill, Inc., 1967. Haggarty, M. The Owattona a r t education p r o j e c t . Minneapolis: The Uni-v e r s i t y of Minnesota Press, 1936. C i t e d i n E. Eisner, E d u c a t i n g - a r t i s t i c  v i s i o n . New York: MacMillan P u b l i s h i n g Co., Inc., 1972. H a r r i s , D. Children's drawings as measures of i n t e l l e c t u a l maturity. New York: Harcourt, Brace & World, Inc., I963T Herberholz, D., & Herberholz, B. A c h i l d ' s p u r s u i t of a r t . Dubuque, Iowa: Wm. C. Brown, Co., Publishers, 19&Y. H i l l , E. The language of drawing. Englewood C l i f f s , New Jersey: Prentice-H a l l , Inc., 1966. Inhelder, B., & Piaget, J. The growth of l o g i c a l thinking from childhood  to adolescence. New York: Basic Books, 1958' Jackson, P. L i f e i n classrooms. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc., 1968. Kaupelis, R. Learning to draw. New York: Watson-Guptill P u b l i c a t i o n s , 1970. Kaupelis, R. Experimental drawing. New York: Watson-Guptill P u b l i c a t i o n s , 1980. Kellogg, R. Analyzing children's a r t . Palo A l t o , C a l i f o r n i a : National Press Books, 1970. Kerr, M. Children's drawings o f houses. B r i t i s h Journal of Medical  Psychology. 1937, 16, 206-218. Kubie, L. Neurotic d i s t o r t i o n of the creative process. New York: Noonday, 1958. Kuhn, M. S t r u c t u r i n g a r t education through a n a l y t i c and analogic modes of knowing. Studies i n A r t Education, 1980, 22 ( l ) . Lansing, K. A r t , a r t i s t s and a r t education. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1971. Lark-Horowitz, B. Interlinkage of sensory memories i n r e l a t i o n to t r a i n i n g i n drawing. Journal of Genetic Psychology, 1936, 4_9, 69-89. 70 Linderman, E. , & Herberholz, D. Developing a r t i s t i c and perceptual awareness,. New York: Wm. G. Brown, Co., Publishers, 1974. Lowenfeld, V., & B r i t t a i n , W. Creative and mental growth. New York: MacMillan, 1970. Maslow, A. C r e a t i v i t y i n s e l f - a c t u a l i z i n g people. In H. Anderson (Ed.), C r e a t i v i t y and i t s c u l t i v a t i o n . New York: Harper and Row, 1959. Maslow, A. Emotional blocks to c r e a t i v i t y . In S. Parnes and H. Harding (Eds.), A source book f o r creative thinking. New York: Scribner's 1971. May, R. In McMullan, W., Creative i n d i v i d u a l s : paradoxical personages. Creative Behavior, 1976, 10 (4). McKim, R. Experiences i n v i s u a l thinking. Monterey, C a l i f o r n i a : Brooks-Cole P u b l i s h i n g Co., 1972. McMullan, ¥. Creative i n d i v i d u a l s : paradoxical personages. Journal of  Creative Behavior, 1976, 10 (4). Mendelowitz, D. A guide to drawing. New York: Holt Rinehart and Winston, 1976. Mugnaini, J . , & Louvos, J. Drawing: a search f o r form. New York: Van Nostrand, Reinhold Co., 1965. Mugnaini, J. The hidden elements of drawing. New York: Van Nostrand, Reinhold Co., 1974. Muholland, T. A program f o r the EEG study of a t t e n t i o n i n v i s u a l communi-cation. In Randhawa & Coffman (Eds.), V i s u a l learning, thinking and  communication. New York: Academic Press, 1978. Munro, T. A r t education, i t s philosophy and psychology. New York: The L i b e r a l A r t s Press, 1956. N i c o l a i d e s , K. The natural way to draw. Boston: Houghton M i f f l i n Co., 1941. Ornstein, R. The psychology of consciousness. New York: V i k i n g Press, 1972. Pavio, A. On exploring v i s u a l knowledge. In Randhawa & Coffman (Eds.), V i s u a l learning, thinking and communication. New York: Academic Press, 1978. Randhawa, B. V i s u a l t r i n i t y : an overview. In Randhawa, B. & Coffman (Eds.), V i s u a l l e a r n i n g , t h i n k i n g and communication. New York: Aca-demic Press, 1978. Read, S i r H. The s i g n i f i c a n c e of children's a r t : a r t as symbolic language. Vancouver: The U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1957. 71 Read, H. Education through a r t . New York: Pantheon Books, 1945. Richards, M., & Ross, E. Developmental changes i n children's drawings. B r i t i s h Journal of Educational Psychology, 1967, 37, 73-80. Ritson, J . , & Smith, Creative teaching of a r t i n the elementary school. Boston: A l l y n and Bacon, Inc., 1975. Rohwer, W. Images and pictures i n children's learning: research results and educational implications. Psychological B u l l e t i n , 1970, 73 (6), 393-404. Rouse, M. A new look at an old theory: a comparison of Lowenfeld's haptic-v i s u a l theory with Witkin's perceptual theory. Studies i n A r t Education, 1965, 7 (1). Samples, B. The metaphoric Mind. Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley Publishing Co., 1976. Sarason, S. The culture of the school and the problem of change. Boston: A l l y n and Bacon, 1971. Schwartz, G., Davidson, R., & Pugash, E. Voluntary control of patterns of EEG asymmetry: cognitive components. Psychophysiology, 1976, 13, 498-504. Simmons I I I , S., & Winer, M. Drawing, the creative process. Englewood C l i f f s , New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1977. Simpson, I. Drawing, seeing and observation. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold, Co., 1973. Wachowiak, F., & Ramsay, T. Emphasis: art. Scranton, Pennsylvania: Intext Educational Publishers, 1971. Walmsley, L. Approaches to drawing. London: Evans Brothers Ltd., n.d. 72 Appendix A. Drawing Surveys PILOT . -- DRAWING SURVEY NAME, . m 7 E * 1. How a r t i s t i c do people in your family think you are? very a r t i s t i c somewhat a r t i s t i c not at a l l a r t i s t i c 2. How well do you think you draw? very well about average not very well 3. Indicate how frequently you draw the items in the l i s t belowi very often sometimes hardly ever cars, trucks 4 machines •  planes or boats horses other animals people faces - front view faces - side view clothes, fashion design '  space scenes trees and. flowers mountains 4 landscape '  cartoon characters battle scenes monsters guns 4 tanks buildings ; everyday objectst bicycles, furniture, etc. Check only one answeri 5. Do you draw best from memory or from real objects or from photographs? from memory real objects photographs 6. Name an object silently and close your eyes. Indicate how clearly i t appears in your mind. very clearly pictured not very clear not pictured at a l l 7. Do you do most of your drawing when you are alone or with other people? alone sometimes alone 4 sometimes with others mostly with others 8. Did you do more drawing when you were younger than you do now? more when younger about the same more now 73 Pilot Drawing Survey page 2 Name 9. Do you ever get discouraged with your drawing because you can't sake i t look l i k e the real thing? often discouraged hardly ever never discouraged 10. Do you think i t i s important to learn to do overlapping, shading, perspective and point of view in drawing? extremely important f a i r l y important not very important 11. When you draw how often do you try to use the following techniquesi very often some times hardly ever overlapping shading perspective texture unusual or different point of view 12. What has helped you the most i n learning to draw? (indicate 18t, 2nd, 3 r d , 4 t h choices) lessons drawing real objects looking at other people's drawings copying photos and cartoons 13. Bo you dream in technicalour? most of the time sometimes never 14. Indicate how good you think you are at drawing the items in the l i s t belowi f a i r l y good average not very good space scenes trees and flowers mountains 4 landscape cartoon characters battle scenes monsters guns 4 tanks buildings ' ' everyday objects, bikes, furniture, etc. clothes, fashion design - faqes - side view faces - front view people horseB other animals planes or boats r a r s . t r u c k s A m a c h i n e s ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ • 74 Pilot Drawing Survey page 3 NaHE 15. In the space below, draw a picture of a person. Include as many realistic  details as you can. Use the f u l l sheet of paper for your drawing. \ 75 P i l o t Drawing Survey page 4 " NAKEi 16. Briefly, t e l l what i t i s that you think you draw best and how you learned to draw i t i 17. In the space below, make a drawing of the thing you draw best, ( i f you are not sure what to draw, you nay draw an imaginary scene, an object in this room or your shoe.) 76 Drawing Surveys i":!: and II DRAWING SUHVEY NAMEi . AGE i Years Months Hov well do you think you draw? very well about average not very well How ar t i s t i c do your friends think you are? very a r t i s t i c somewhat a r t i s t i c not at a l l a r t i s t i c Indicate how well you like t« draw the items in the l i s t belowi very well f a i r l y well not well at a l l cars, trucks & machines planes or boats horses other animals ' •  people faces - front view faces - side view clothes, fashion design .  space scenes trees and flowers mountains 4 landscape cartoon characters ._ battle scenes monsters gVns & tanks buildings everyday objectst bicycles furniture, etc. * 4 . Do you draw best from memory or from real objects or from photographs? from memory real objects photographs 5. Close your eyes and try to picture your family car. Indicate how clearly i t appears in your mind. very clearly pictured not very clear not pictured at a l l 6. How Important Is practice in learning to draw? very important somewhat important not important 7. How important is i t to concentrate while making a drawing? very important somewhat important not important 77 Drawing Survey page 2 NAMEi 8. Do you ever get discouraged with your drawing because you can't Bake i t look like the real thing? often discouraged _ hardly ever never discouraged 9. When you draw, how often are you aware of the followingt very often sometimes hardly ever The source of light on the object Negative spaces l e f t by the object The size of the object ln relation to the size of the paper . Shadows and darker tones on the surface of the object 10. What has helped you the most in learning to draw? (Rank choicest 1st, 8nd, 3rd, 4th) a) lessons b) drawing from real objects c) looking at artist's and other people's drawings d) copying photos and cartoons 11. Indicate how well you think you draw the items in the l i s t belowt very well about average not very well Space scenes trees and flowers mountains A landscapes cartoon characters battle scenes monsters guns 4 tanks buildings everyday objects, bikes, furniture clothes, fashion design faces - side view faces - front view people horses other animals planes or boats cars, trucks 4 machines 78 - Drawing Survey page 3 MKEi 14. In the space below, draw a camplete picture of a person. Make the best drawing you can. Include realistic details. Use the f u l l sheet of paper for your drawing. 1 _ 37 2 _ 3 8 _ 3 39 4 40 5 41 6 42 7 * 3 _ 8 44 9 10 46 11 47 12 48 13 49 14 50 15 51 16 52 17 53 18 5 4 _ 19 55 20 56 21 ~ 57 22 58 23 59 24 60 61 26 62 27 63 28 64 29 65 30 66 31_ 6 ? _ 32 68 33 69 34 70 35 71 36._. 72 79 Braving Survey page 4 NAJKEi 12. What do you think you draw best? 13. Tell how you learned to draw i t . lk. In the space below, sake a drawing of the thing you draw best. (If you are not sure what to draw, you may draw an imaginary scene, an object in this room or your shoe.) 80 Appendix B In s t r u c t i o n a l A c t i v i t i e s A c t i v i t y 1 - Chairs; Negative Space (see Figure l ) Introduction. A f t e r a discussion of p o s i t i v e and negative space, students were i n v i t e d to explore the concept by drawing a p r o f i l e on a small piece of paper.- They were then instru c t e d to draw the reverse pro-f i l e f a c i n g the f i r s t one and to connect the two a t the top and the bottom. They were then asked to shade i n the space i n between them. In the d i s -cussion which followed, they indicated that they were able to read the image e i t h e r as a vase or as two p r o f i l e s . When asked which l i n e ( p r o f i l e ) had been more d i f f i c u l t to draw, they agreed that the second p r o f i l e was harder because i t had to be copied i n the opposite d i r e c t i o n . In each c l a s s some-one mentioned that i t was harder to copy than to draw from imagination be-cause you had a standard of comparison present. I t was also mentioned i n each discussion that, on the f i r s t p r o f i l e , you could say to yourself, "This i s a forehead; t h i s i s a nose, e t c . , " but on the second one, you had to draw without benefit of verbal d i r e c t i o n s and had to r e l y on references to angles and changes i n d i r e c t i o n a l l i n e . Preliminary exercise - Figure-ground r e v e r s a l . Students were given a chance to p r a c t i c e a more complicated l i n e . They were asked to construct a grotesque p r o f i l e of a monster (complete with warts and blemishes) and were in s t r u c t e d to draw the f a c i n g p r o f i l e . Some traced the f i r s t pro-f i l e with a f i n g e r of one hand while they drew ..with the other. Others erased many times before they were s a t i s f i e d . Roughly 50% of the students i n a l l classes thought t h i s exercise was eas i e r than the previous one. Some sa i d i t was because they were' "getting the idea;" others s a i d i t F i g u r e 1. C h a i r s 82 was because they were able to make up t h e i r own p r o f i l e while on the f i r s t exercise they had t r i e d to make t h e i r s look l i k e the teacher's. The other h a l f of the students f e l t t h i s was the more d i f f i c u l t exercise because the l i n e s and angles were more complicated to copy. Drawing a c t i v i t y - P o s i t i v e and negative space. A f t e r a f u r t h e r d i s -cussion of negative space, students were asked to look a t groups of chairs placed on tables a t the f r o n t and back of the room. They were in s t r u c t e d to draw only the spaces i n and around the chairs and to make the spaces touch the edge of the paper i n at l e a s t two places. Many cheated and t r i e d to draw the o u t l i n e s of the ch a i r s . They were asked to turn t h e i r papers over and to t r y again. When students f i n i s h e d t h e i r drawings they were allowed to colour i n the negative spaces with o i l pastels. Black paint was then applied to the e n t i r e surface r e v e a l i n g the p o s i t i v e shapes of the cha i r s . A c t i v i t y 2 - Live Model (see Figure 2) Introduction. A f t e r the previous week's t r y a t drawing negative space, students were asked i f they would l i k e to t r y drawing from l i f e with a c l a s s -mate f o r a model. A l l were ent h u s i a s t i c about the idea. In the d i s c u s s i o n which followed they were asked to think of ways t h i s week's drawing would d i f f e r from l a s t week's (the model i s a l i v e and w i l l tend to move; i t w i l l get t i r e d and the drawing w i l l occupy p o s i t i v e instead of negative space). I t was stressed, however, that both drawings would be a l i k e i n r e q u i r i n g c a r e f u l observation and recording of the observations. A l l classes were asked to devise a simple, c l e a r set of r u l e s f o r the- model and the c l a s s to follow. The model would remain--as "^mmoving as possible, pick a spot on the wall at which to gaze and take the r o l e s e r i o u s l y . The c l a s s would draw Figure 2. Live Model 1 m conscientiously during the model's poses and agree not to• do anything to d i s t r a c t the model's attention. There was a short discussion of materials to be used (school pencils and 12" x 18" white cartridge paper). I t was established that the paper was chosen to provide maximum contrast with the pencil l i n e and that i t s rather l i g h t weight meant that erasures had to be done judiciously to avoid tearing the paper. Students were asked to t r y to make t h e i r figures large enough to make the negative spaces around them interesting. Drawing a c t i v i t y . Models were chosen from w i l l i n g volunteers (about s i x to eight students i n each class volunteered). Each class had a boy and a g i r l posing i n opposite ends of the room at the same time. Students were instructed to move t h e i r desks i f necessary to get an unobstructed view and to draw the model they could see most completely and most comfortably. Models were given straight standing poses to approximate as nearly as possible the most common pose used i n the Draw. A' Person Test. Students were asked to draw f o r the entire session. They were to practice observing and to draw continuously f o r the 40-minute period and to s t a r t on the other model i f they f i n i s h e d the f i r s t one before the time was up. There was one eight minute pose at the beginning of the session followed by four f i v e minute poses. Breaks were three minutes long. A c t i v i t y 3 _ Household Objects: Contour (see Figure 3) Introduction. There was a discussion of l a s t week's drawing from l i v e models. Students agreed that t h e i r favourite method of drawing was to look at the model and to draw what they remembered while looking at their' paper. In each class i t was mentioned that they often' forgot what they saw be-tween the time they looked away from the model and the time they began Figure 3.'Household Objects 86 drawing on t h e i r paper. When asked what they d i d about t h i s problem, about 2% of the students s a i d they looked again and the r e s t s a i d they "sort of made i t up." Preliminary exercise #1 - Upside-down drawing. A l i n e drawing of a seated f i g u r e was drawn upside-down on the board. Students were given small paper (4" x 5") and asked to copy the drawing on the board. They were t o l d to draw only while looking at the board. They could stop t h e i r p e n c i l a t any time to check t h e i r progress on paper, but they should only begin moving i t again when t h e i r gaze returned to the f i g u r e on the board. I t was made c l e a r that t h i s was just an exercise, the r e s u l t s of which they would enjoy sharing with t h e i r f r i e n d s . They were given ten minutes to complete the drawing and were asked to keep drawing and observing f o r the entire time. I f they f i n i s h e d e a r l y they were to turn the paper over and begin again. Preliminary exercise #2 - B l i n d contour drawing. In order to provide p r a c t i c e i n drawing only while looking at an object, students were asked to draw a c h a i r while I traced i t s contours with my fi n g e r . They were asked to draw slowly and d e l i b e r a t e l y and not to l e t t h e i r p e n c i l get ahead of t h e i r point of focus on the teacher's f i n g e r . They drew f o r f i v e minutes. A l l students attempted to draw only while looking at the chair. Drawing a c t i v i t y . Groups were given battered, but i n t e r e s t i n g o l d household objects to draw ( o l d clock mechanism, antique toaster, telephones) which they dubbed "Beautiful Junk." They were asked to draw them using the techniques they had j u s t p r a c t i c e d (contour l i n e , drawing while d i r e c t l y observing the object). We discussed materials, noting the richness and q u a l i t y of l i n e that could be obtained using s o f t lead drawing p e n c i l s on manila paper. Students were asked to draw f o r the e n t i r e 3 5 - m i n u t e session. When they f i n i s h e d one object they could begin another one or- t r y i t from a s l i g h t l y d i f f e r e n t angle. 8? Activity 4 - Skeleton: Gesture and Volume (see Figure 4) Introduction. We discussed the skeleton model in the classroom and the students located the major hones and joints on themselves. They practiced sighting along a pencil to measure the relative proportions of different parts of the body. Preliminary exercise - Drawing volume. We discussed the concept of volume and mass in contrast to the concept of outline. Students were asked to use the side of their white o i l pastel and, through careful observation of the model, to draw quickly and l i g h t l y the mass of the entire skeleton before "re-visiting" each part i n detail. They were asked to press, hardest on the parts closest to them so that they would show up lightest on their grey paper and to draw continuously for ten minutes. They were to f i l l their papers with skeletons, beginning a new one each time they finished one. They were also reminded of the importance- of looking at the model while they were drawing and asked not to look at their papers as they drew. Drawing activity. In the discussion of the preliminary exercise, most students admitted that they had had trouble remembering to draw the mass or volume f i r s t instead of the outline. They f e l t , however, that they were getting better at drawing while looking directly at an object. We talked about empathy and of the a r t i s t i c necessity to become involved with the subject of one's drawing through feeling. We discussed some of the feelings that one might have toward this skeleton (horror, compassion, pity, etc.). Students were asked to plan their pictures so that the skeleton f i l l e d the entire page and to f i l l in the mass of the whole figure with the side of of their o i l pastel before going back to refine details. Because they were using white o i l pastel on black construction paper (l8" x 24"), they were told to press hardest on the parts closest to them to accentuate their proximity. 8 8 Figure 4. Skeleton 89 Before beginning to draw students were asked to adopt a describable f e e l i n g or a t t i t u d e toward the skeleton and to maintain i t during the drawing. The students drew f o r 30 minutes. A c t i v i t y j - Bones and Pumpkins; Continuous Contour and Tone (see Figures 5 and 6) Introduction. S t i l l l i f e arrangements of bones and pumpkins were d i s -played a t each table. Students were asked to t r y to i d e n t i f y the types of bones and t h e i r functions. A t t e n t i o n was c a l l e d to the shapes'-and-textures inherent i n each object. We reviewed the d i f f e r e n c e s between contour draw-ing (slow, c a r e f u l , part-to-part b u i l d up of form with s e n s i t i v e l i n e ) and gesture (quick rendering of t o t a l mass with i n d i c a t i o n s of movement and volume) which they had t r i e d i n t h e i r skeleton drawings the week before. We discussed the importance (and d i f f i c u l t y ) of drawing while l o o k i n g a t the object. The video camera was also introduced. Preliminary exercise - Tone. ' Several tonal drawings were shown on the opaque p r o j e c t o r and students discussed d i f f e r e n t ways of achieving three dimensional e f f e c t s . P i c t u r e s of modeled spheres, c y l i n d e r s and rectangles were shown and students were asked to i d e n t i f y d i r e c t i o n of l i g h t source, cast shadows, h i g h l i g h t s , deep tones and middle tones. They were asked to choose an object i n the s t i l l l i f e arrangement a t t h e i r table, squint and i d e n t i f y three d i f f e r e n t tones i n the object. Some had d i f f i -c u l t y because of the r e f l e c t e d l i g h t i n the room, but a l l s a i d they could f i n d a t l e a s t one h i g h l i g h t , cast shadow, middle and deep tone. Students were given a piece of 8" x 11" grey construction paper and black and white o i l pastels. A f t e r choosing a pumpkin or squash i n t h e i r s t i l l l i f e arrangement, they were to squint at i t u n t i l they could i d e n t i f y the tones we had discussed and then draw i t quickly with the side of t h e i r 90 Figure 5- Bones and Pumpkins; Tone Figure 6. Bones and Pumpkins 92 black o i l p a s t e l , using only tone to define i t s mass. They were to put i n h i g h l i g h t s with the white o i l p a s t e l and were given three minutes to complete the drawing. Drawing a c t i v i t y . Students were given 12" x 18" white cartridge paper and black, water soluble, f e l t - t i p p e d pens. They were asked to draw the s t i l l l i f e arrangements i n f r o n t of them beginning with the form nearest to them and to draw using a continuous contour l i n e . They were to draw f o r 20 minutes without l i f t i n g t h e i r pen from the paper and to draw only while looking d i r e c t l y at the object. Once the arrangement was complete, they were in s t r u c t e d to repeat the forms they l i k e d best and to f i l l the paper with bones and pumpkins, paying p a r t i c u l a r a t t e n t i o n to the negative spaces formed by the additionsof each object. When f i n i s h e d , students were asked to i d e n t i f y tonal areas i n each object and to use water and a brush to wash the water soluble ink into the darkest areas to create volume. A c t i v i t y 6 - B i c y c l e s ; Memory Drawing and Viewfinders (see Figures 7 and 8) Introduction. I t was ascertained that everyone i n a l l four classes owned a b i c y c l e . We talked about our bikes: what kinds we had, how we got them,how often we rode them, our e a r l i e s t memories of them and how we f e l t toward our p a r t i c u l a r b i c y c l e . Students were asked to close t h e i r eyes' and to r a i s e t h e i r hand as soon as they were able to v i s u a l i z e t h e i r bikes c l e a r l y . Roughly k-0% of a l l students i n each c l a s s indicated they could c l e a r l y p i c t u r e a mental image of t h e i r b i c y c l e . The r e s t of the students indicated that they could see parts c l e a r l y , but could not see •the whole object c l e a r l y . ••• i.'h/rvThree-'-s-tud-en-ts ind i c a t e d they could not see any image a t a l l with t h e i r eyes closed. These students f e l t confident, 93 Figure ?. Memory Bicycle 94 Figure 8 . Bicycles,! 'Vlewfinders 95 however, that they could 'remember' everything well enough to draw t h e i r b i -cycles. Preliminary exercise - Memory drawing. Students were asked to draw t h e i r bicycle from memory i n pencil on 11" x 14" manila paper using any type of l i n e or method they wanted to as long as they drew the best memory bicycle they could. They were also asked to think about t h e i r feelings about t h e i r bicycle as they drew i t and to t r y to maintain a p a r t i c u l a r f e e l i n g or attitude toward i t . They were to draw f o r 20 minutes from memory. I f they fini s h e d before that time, they could turn the paper over and begin another drawing of something from t h e i r memory. Students discussed d i f f i c u l t i e s they had try i n g to draw from memory. Many said they forgot to maintain a p a r t i c u l a r attitude toward t h e i r bike because they had been so busy t r y i n g to remember what i t looked l i k e . Drawing a c t i v i t y . We discussed a r t i s t i c selection and practiced using viewfinders. Students were given viewfinders with a square opening and a square piece of manila paper folded into quarters. They were asked to select parts of the display bicycle using the viewfinder and to draw what they saw with a firm contour l i n e on one quarter of the paper. They were to pay pa r t i c u l a r attention to the r e l a t i v e placement of l i n e s and shapes i n the viewfinder and to make these correspond to the placement on t h e i r paper. When they finished drawing i n a l l four squares, they could shade i n the negative spaces. Many students found using the viewfinder was t i r i n g so they began shading i n negative spaces a f t e r each drawing instead of f i n i s h i n g the whole series f i r s t . A c t i v i t y 7 - S e l f P o r t r a i t s : Continuous Contour (see Figure 9) Introduction. Examples of s e l f p o r t r a i t drawings were shown. We discussed q u a l i t y of l i n e , placement, tone and emphasis. Students noted that 96 Figure 9. Self Portrait ' 97 some of the p o r t r a i t s r e l i e d h e a v i l y on shaded volume, some on pure l i n e and some on a combination f o r e f f e c t . We t a l k e d about c l a r i t y and honesty i n r e -c o r d i n g what i s observed. P r e l i m i n a r y e x e r c i s e - B l i n d contour o f separate f e a t u r e s . Students were given a 3" x 4" card to p i e r c e w i t h t h e i r p e n c i l p o i n t to a c t as a " b l i n d " w h i l e they drew s p e c i f i c f e a t u r e s o f the person s i t t i n g d i r e c t l y across from them. They were asked to draw each f e a t u r e u s i n g a continuous l i n e and to draw only while l o o k i n g a t the f e a t u r e . They were not to l i f t the t i p of t h e i r p e n c i l nor to l o o k a t t h e i r drawing u n t i l they had completed the f e a t u r e . When f i n i s h e d w i t h one f e a t u r e , they were to f i n d a c l e a n space on t h e i r paper and draw the remaining f e a t u r e s . They were given f i v e minutes to complete a s e t o f f e a t u r e s . Most students found the e x e r c i s e d i f f i c u l t . They admitted "cheating" i n order to "sneak a peak" a t t h e i r drawing o r l i f t i n g the p e n c i l to a more advantageous spot to begin a new l i n e . Each c l a s s agreed t h a t they would t r y hard i n the next a c t i v i t y to maintain a continuous l i n e . Drawing a c t i v i t y . Students were given m i r r o r s , f e l t - t i p p e d b l ack pens and 12" x 16" white c a r t r i d g e paper. They were asked to spend 20 minutes drawing t h e i r own faces w i t h a continuous l i n e . About h a l f of the students began w i t h the h a i r f i r s t and the r e s t were almost e q u a l l y d i v i d e d between those who began w i t h the eyes and those who drew the lower contour o f the face f i r s t . A c t i v i t y 8 - L i v e Model (see Figure 10) I n t r o d u c t i o n . The students were e n t h u s i a s t i c about having the chance to draw t h e i r classmates once again. We reviewed what we had le a r n e d about r e l a t i v e body p r o p o r t i o n s , e s t a b l i s h i n g l i g h t sources and placement of f e a t u r e s on the face. Two students ( a boy and a g i r l ) were chosen from the 98 9 9 many who volunteered to pose i n each c l a s s . We reviewed the ru l e s f o r drawing from a model. The model agreed to remain as unmoving as possible and the clas s agreed to draw conscientiously during the model's pose and to t r y not to do anything that would d i s t r a c t the model's atten t i o n . Drawing a c t i v i t y . Each c l a s s had a boy and a g i r l posing i n opposite ends of the room a t the same time as before. Students were t o l d to draw the model they could see most completely and comfortably and to move t h e i r desks i f necessary to get an unobstructed view. Models were given s t r a i g h t standing poses as before to most nearly approximate the most common pose used i n t h e i r Draw A: Person Test. There was an i n i t i a l eight minute pose followed by four f i v e minute poses. • Breaks were three minutes long. Students r e f e r r e d to the model often while they drew and no one drew with t h e i r back completely to the model as some had i n the f i r s t l i v e model assignment. The drawings were l a r g e r and lo o s e r than they had been previously and many students f i n i s h e d more quickly. 100 Appendix G Scoring C r i t e r i a f o r Drawings Scoring C r i t e r i a f o r Live Model Drawings - Male or Female 1. Head present 2. Neck present 3. Neck, two dimensions ( s u f f i c i e n t l y wide to support head) 4. Eyes present 5. Eye d e t a i l : "brow or lashes' 6. Eye d e t a i l : pupil (ho convergence or divergence) 7. Eye d e t a i l : proportion (horizontal length greater than v e r t i c a l ) 8. Nose present 9. Nose, two dimensions ; 10. Bridge of nose (length greater than width) 11. N o s t r i l s c l e a r l y and correctly shown 12. Mouth present 13. 'VLips,- two dimensions 14. Beth nose and l i p s i n two dimensions 15;•1' Both' chin-and forehead shown 16. Chin c l e a r l y indicated 17. Hair: substance, shaped matter 18. Hair: directed or brushed l i n e s indicating texture 19. Hair: .distinct s t y l e 20. Hair: indication 21. Ears' pre sent 22. Ears: proportion and position correct 23. Shoulders: clear change of d i r e c t i o n (may not be square) 24. Shoulders: correct armpit 25. Arms: c o r r e c t length 26. Arms a t side (or active) 27. Elbow j o i n t indicated 28. Fingers present 29. Fingers: correct number 30. Fingers: d e t a i l c o r r e c t 31. Opposition of thumb 32. Hands present (back of hand indicated) 33- Wrist and ankle shown 34. Legs present 35. Hip: crotch or hip convexity ( c o r r e c t angle) 36. Hip: elaboration or modeling 37. Knee j o i n t i n d i c a t e d 38. Feet: placement appropriate to f i g u r e 39. Feet: proportion to f i g u r e 40. Feet: d e t a i l 41. Feet: d e f i n i t e s t y l e of footwear (complete) 42. Clothing: i n d i c a t i o n 43. Clothing: d e t a i l sleeve and neckline 44. Clothing: d e t a i l waist and below 45. Clothing: no transparancies 46. Clothing: d e f i n i t e type, complete, no inco n g r u i t i e s 47. Clothing: f i n e d e t a i l s ( s t i c h e s , button holes) 48. Proportion: face (length greater than width) 49. Proportion: head to trunk 50. Proportion: arm narrows to w r i s t 102 51. Proportion: hand to f i g u r e 52. Proportion: legs to trunk 5 3 • Motors juncture of l i n e s 5 4 . Motor: c o n t r o l l e d l i n e 55. Motor: superior c o n t r o l , free of erasures 56. Sketching technique 57- Modeling technique: drapery shown, attempt at shading 58. Directed l i n e s : head ou t l i n e 59. Directed l i n e s : trunk 60. Directed l i n e s : appendages may not narrow j o i n i n g "body 61. Directed l i n e s : swelling at c a l f and forearm. 62. F a c i a l features: symmetrical 63. P e n c i l pressure appropriate 6 4 . S i z e : proportional to the paper (not l e s s than l/2) 65. Jaw l i n e c l e a r l y indicated DO NOT COPY LEAVES 103-108. The Goodenough-Harris Draw a Person 103 ' Test may be found i n D. Harris, Children's Drawings as a Measure-,^ of I n t e l l e c t u a l Maturity (New York: Harcourt Brace and World, 19o3v. Goodenough-Harris Draw A Person Test Scoring C r i t e r i a f o r Draw A-Pe-rsen-Test - Woman Point Scale 1. Head present 2. Neck Present 3. Neck,two dimensions 4. Eyes present 5. Eye d e t a i l : brow or lashes 6. Eye d e t a i l 5 pupil 7. Eye d e t a i l : proportion 8. Cheeks 9. Nose present 10. Nose, two dimensions 11. Bridge of nose 12. N o s t r i l s shown 13. Mouth present 14. Lips, two dimensions 15. "Cosmetic l i p s " 16. Both nose and l i p s i n two dimensions 17. Both chin and forehead shown 18. Line of jaw indicated 19. Hair: i n d i c a t i o n 20. Hair: shaded matter 21. Hair: d e f i n i t e style ' 22. Hair: texture, directed l i n e s 23. Necklace or earrings 24. Arms present 25. Shoulders 26. Arms at side (or engaged i n a c t i v i t y or behind back) 27. Elbow j o i n t shown 28. Fingers present 29. Correct number of fingers - shown 30. D e t a i l of f i n g e r s c o r r e c t 31. Opposition of thumb shown 32. Hands present 33- Legs present 34. Hips shown: corre c t angle of legs 35. Feet: any i n d i c a t i o n 36. Feet: proportion 37. Feet: d e t a i l 38. Shoe: "feminine" 39. Shoe: s t y l e 40. Placement of f e e t appropriate to f i g u r e 41. Attachment of arms and legs to trunk 42. Attachment of arms and legs: c o r r e c t angles 43. Clothing indicated 44. Sleeve: any i n d i c a t i o n 45. Sleeve: d e t a i l 46. Neckline:. other than neck 47. Neckline: d e t a i l , shaped c o l l a r 48. Waist: change i n d i r e c t i o n 49. Waist: better than s i n g l e l i n e 50. S k i r t "modeled" to indic a t e p l e a t s or draping 51. No transparencies i n the f i g u r e 52. Garb feminine 53- Garb complete without i n c o n g r u i t i e s 54. Garb a definite "type" 55. Trunk present 56. Trunk in proportion, two dimensions 57. Head-trunk proportion: head at least l/4 body size 58. Head; proportion 59. Limbs: proportion 60. Arms in proportion to trunk 61. Location of waist 62. Dress-= area 63. Motor coordination: juncture of lines 64. Motor coordination: clean, controlled lines 65- Superior motor coordination: clean, sure, no erasures 66. Directed lines and form: head outline 67. Directed lines and form: breast 68. Directed lines and form: hip contour, convexity 69. Directed lines and form: arms taper 70. Directed lines and form: calf of leg indicated 71. Directed lines and form: facial features symmetrical *72. Ears indicated *73- Proportion: hands and feet to figure *74. Shading or modelling *75. Cartoon features Modifications made by the author 106 Goodenough-Harris Draw A Person Test Scoring C r i t e r i a f o r Draw A Person Test - Man Point Scale 1. Head present . .. 2. Neck present 3. Neck, two dimensions k. Eyes present 5. Eye d e t a i l : brow or lashes 6. Eye d e t a i l : pupil 7. Eye d e t a i l : proportion 8. Eye d e t a i l : glance 9. Nose present 10. Nose, two dimensions 11. Mouth present 12. Lips, two dimensions 13. Both nose and l i p s i n two dimensions 14. Both chin and forehead shown 15. Projection of chin shown: chin d i f f e r e n t i a t e d from lower l i p 16. Line of jaw indicated 17. Bridge of nose 18. Hair: indication 19. Hair: any attempt at substance 20. Hair: style 21. Hair: texture or d i r e c t i o n l i n e s 22. Ears present 23. Ears present: proportion and pos i t i o n 2k. Fingers present 25. Correct number of fingers shown 26. Detail of fingers correct 107 27. Opposition of thumb shown 28. Hands present 29. Wrist or ankle shown 30. Arms present 31. Shoulders: clear change of d i r e c t i o n 32. Shoulders: correct armpit 33. Arms at side or engaged i n a c t i v i t y 34. Elbow j o i n t shown 35. Legs present 36. Hip: crotch correct angle 37. Hip: elaboration 38. Knee j o i n t shown 39. Feet: any ind i c a t i o n 40. Feet: proportion 41. Feet: heel- indicated 42. Feet: perspective appropriate to position of body 43. Feet: d e t a i l and st y l e of shoe 44. Attachment of arms and legs to trunk 45. Attachment of arms and legs: correct angles and pos i t i o n 46. Trunk present 47. Trunk i n proportion, two dimensions 48. Proportion: head to t o t a l figure 49. Proportion: head to trunk area 50. Proportions face 51. Proportions length of arms 52. Proportion: arms narrow to wrist 53. Proportion: legs not l e s s than trunk 108 5 4 . Proportion: limbs i n two dimensions 55. Clothing: i n d i c a t i o n 5 6 . Clothing: two a r t i c l e s shown 5 7 . Clothing: no transparencies 58. Clothing: four a r t i c l e s with d e t a i l 5 9 . Clothing: complete, no i n c o n g r u i t i e s 60. P r o f i l e : features present 61. P r o f i l e : d e t a i l s c o r r e c t 62. F u l l face: features c o r r e c t 63. Motor coordination: juncture of l i n e s 6 4 . Motor coordination: clean, c o n t r o l l e d l i n e s 65. Superior motor coordination: clean, sure, no erasures 66. Directed l i n e s and form: head o u t l i n e 67. Directed l i n e s and form: trunk o u t l i n e 68. Directed l i n e s and form: arms and legs may not narrow a t trunk 69. Directed l i n e s and form: f a c i a l features symmetrical 70. "Sketching" technique 71. "Modeling" technique 72. Arm movement 73. l e g movement *74. Proportion: hands and f e e t to f i g u r e *75- Cartoon features * Modifications made by the author s 109 Appendix D D R A W I N G E V A L U A T I O N S #1 NAME: DIVISION: DATE: ASSIGNMENT: Chairs 1. What do you l i k e best about the drawing you did today? 2. What did you have the most trouble with? 3. Do you understand the difference between POSITIVE and NEGATIVE space? Yes No Not sure 4. Briefly t e l l what i s meant by NEGATIVE space: 5. How well did you concentrate on your drawing? very well f a i r l y well poorly 6. What interfered most with your a b i l i t y to concentrate? 7. How well did you succeed i n making yourself draw only the negative space? very well . f a i r l y well not very well 8. Did you make your drawing large enough so that i t touched the edge of the paper in places? 9r Did the drawing session pass quickly or slowly for you? Quickly Slowly Not aware of time passing 110 D R A W I N G E V A L U A T I O N #2 NAME: DIVISION: DATE: ASSIGNMENT: Live Model 1. How well did you concentrate on your drawing? very well f a i r l y well_ poorly 2. What interfered most with your a b i l i t y to concentrate? 3. What do you l i k e best about the drawing you did today? 4. What did you have the most trouble with? 5 . What do you think you could do to improve your drawing? 6. Did you make your drawing large enough on the paper to make the negative spaces interesting? 7. Which did you enjoy drawing more? T e l l Why. A) Last week's drawing more m  B) This week's drawing more WHY? 8 . Did the drawing session pass quickly or slowly for you? Quickly Slowly Not aware of time passing I l l D R A W I N G E V A L U A T I O N #3 M m t DIVISION: DATE: ASSIGNMENT: Household Objects 1. What did you l i k e best about the drawing you did today? 2 . What did you have the most trouble with? 3. Did you draw slowly enough to allow your pencil to follow your eye around the outline of the object? 4. How well did you concentrate on your drawing today? very well f a i r l y well poorly ' 5. What interfered most with your a b i l i t y to concentrate? 6. Which did you have to concentrate on more? A) Upside down objects B) Right side up objcets WHY? 7. Did you have to concentrate more on this week's drawing or la s t week's? Tel l Why. A.) This week's drawing more B) Last week's drawing more WHY? 8. Did the drawing session pass quickly or slowly for you? Quickly Slowly Not aware of time passing 112 D R A W I N G E V A L U A T I O N #4 N A M E * DIVISION! m T E : ASSIGNMENT: Skeleton 1. Which of the drawings you did today do you l i k e better? Tell WHY? 2. What did you have the most trouble with i n each of today's drawings? #1-#2 -3. How well did you succeed i n l i g h t l y planning the entire drawing before going back and putting i n details? very well f a i r l y well not very well 4. Did you remember to colour the parts closest to you more heavily than the parts farther away? yes some of the time no 5. Were you able to maintain a particular feeling toward the skeleton while you were drawing i t ? Most of the time Sometimes No 6. Describe the feeling you had toward the skeleton while drawing i t . 7. How well were you able to concentrate on your drawing today? very well f a i r l y well poorly 8. What interfered with your a b i l i t y to concentrate? 9. Did the drawing session pass: Quickly Slowly Not aware of Time_ 113 D R A W I N G E V A L U A T I O N #5 NAME: . DIVISION: DATE: ._ ASSIGNMENT: Bones and Pumpkins 1. T e l l what you like test about each of the drawings you did today: #1 #2 2. What do you think you could do to improve each drawing? #1 # 2 3. How well did you succeed i n keeping your eye focussed on the object while you drew i t ? very well f a i r l y well not very well 4. Were you able to identify the shadows and highlights on the objects? yes no 5. Which did you have the most trouble seeing? a) shadows b) highlights 6. How well did you concentrate on your drawing? very well f a i r l y well poorly 7. What interfered most with your a b i l i t y to concentrate? 8. Show that you understand how to shade a ci r c l e with a given l i g h t source by shading the small circles below. 114 D R A W I N G E V A L U A T I O N #6 NAME: DIVISION: DATE: ASSIGNMENT: Bicycles 1. How well did you concentrate on each of the drawings today? A.) Memory Bicycle - very well f a i r l y well poorly B) Viewfinder - Parts - very well f a i r l y well poorly 2. Which drawing did you have to concentrate on more? Tell Why? A) Memory B) Viewfinder 3. What interfered with your a b i l i t y to concentrate? 4. Were you able to maintain a conscious feeling or attitude toward the bicycle while you drew i t from memory? Yes Slightly No 5. Describe the feeling you had toward the bicycle in your memory drawing. 6. In the viewfinder drawings, were you aware of the following while you drew: Yes Sometimes No Negative space Direction of line Taking mental measurements. Time passing Placement of the drawing relative to placement in viewfinder window Distractions in the class 7. T e l l what you had the most d i f f i c u l t y with i n today's drawing session. 115 D R A ¥ I N G E V A L U A T I O N #7 NAME: DIVISION: D A T E . ASSIGNMENT: Self Portrait 1. How well did you concentrate on today's drawing? very well ' f a i r l y w e l 1 P ° ° r l y 2. What interfered with your a b i l i t y to concentrate? 3. How well did you succeed i n keeping the t i p of your pen on the paper in the continuous line drawing? very well f a i r l y well not very well 4. Which part of the face did you have most trouble with? T e l l Why 5. Why do you think you had trouble with i t ? 6. Did the drawing session pass quickly or slowly for you? Quickly Slowly Not aware of time passing 7. Which part of the face did you have the most success in drawing? 116 D R A W I N G E V A L U A T I O N #8 NAME: DIVISION: '  DATE: ASSIGNMENT: Live Model 1. What do you l i k e best about the drawing you did today? 2. What did you have the most trouble with? 3. How well did you concentrate on today's drawing? very well f a i r l y well poorly 4. What interfered with your a b i l i t y to concentrate? 5. Star the drawings below that you enjoyed doing most i n this unit. Put an x next to the ones you enjoyed doing least i n the unit. Negative space - chairs Live drawings from a model Household objects - "Beautiful Junk" Skeletons Bones and pumpkins Bicycles Self portraits 6. What do you think are the most important things to keep i n mind when you are learning to draw? 7. Did today's drawing session pass quickly or slowly for you? Quickly Slowly Not aware of time passing Appendix E 1.17 DATE. November 24 Sample Teacher Logs T E A C H E R L 0 G # 8_ DIVISION 1 ASSIGNMENT: Live model Ex - refers to model 0 - does not refer to model Entrance Introduction: w- completes plan of whole before doing details b - begins with (head, feet, etc.) T - talking and not drawing ss- second start Lively but f a i r l y orderly Listened quietly during introduction 3. Atmosphere in room: eager, relaxed 4 . Levels of concentration and participation: 11 :00 - 11 : 08 . 11 :20-11*25 1 1 : 3 5 - H : 4 0 11 : 45 - 1 1 : 55 Pose #1- some giggling at first...settled in 30 seconds #2 - 11:11 - 11:16 settl immediately..absolute si #3 - settled immediatel excellent concentratio ed Lence f #4 Excellent concen-tration even by this pose Fill e d out Evaluation-independently and auietly -most worked on drawing until the bell Distractions:Borrowing erasers. Desks turning during #4 to draw other model 6. Feelings toward class & Individuals during lesson. Why? , #1 Triangle of talkers at T-3 irritating. Pleased with effort and concentration evident. No effort i s needed to maintain quiet. Rest of class drawing seriously and with purpose. Talking ceases after pose #1. 6 kept drawing during Break #1, Break #2 was quieter... some movement & sharing; 9 kept drawing. 4 drew during Break #3 7. Feelings after class leaves. Why? Some excellent drawings. Best class yet a l l completed 8 . Spot checks. Remarks: Triangle at T-3 wastes a lot of time work reflects their disinterest | b-head , Exl234 b-head b-head I Ex 1234 Exl23 * (finished ait 3 sits I m o model Most students observing model even when they get to clothing ->• -ss - — i b-head . _ _ _ T234 T234 I I b-head b-head T T , ' Exl234 Ex 1234 012 Ex 3 ss 111 1 04 0124 Ex3 1 ' b-head Exl234 w E x l 2 034 b-head 1 Exl234 ' 1 L constant verbal on visual exchange 1 fT-feet" ' T2-01, Ex234 clowning b-head T2 I b-head Exl234 (finishes -begins new b-hair m o d e l ar 4) 11 b-head j | Ex 1 4 023 I J E x l 2 b-head -head Ex 1234 , , Ex 123 0 1234 b-head Exl234 04 b-head Ex 1234 J b-head Ex 1234 J b-head j Ex 123 b-head 01 Ex 234.- draws "stock" head Jrefers to model for clothes 118 DA 7Z •. November 16, 1981 Ex - refers to model D - does not refer to model T E A C H E D L 0 G # 8 DIVISION 2 ASSIGNMENT: Live Model w— completes plan,of whole before doing details b - begins with (head, feet, etc.) T - talking and not drawing ss - second start 1. Entrance: Orderly 2. Introduction: Attentive 3. Atmosphere in room: lively, relaxed 4. Levels of concentration and participation: 11:00-11:08 11:20-11:25 1 1 : 35-11:^0 11:45 - 11:55 Pose #1 - Quiet right away, no talking durii 1st pose #2 11:11-11:16 - Excel-lent concentration #3 - a l l drawing at g f i r s t in absolute silence. Talking begins after 3 mins. #4 - Fair concentratioi some whispering afte 2 minutes.. Quiet talking by end of pose Evaluation -Quiet and Indepen-dent -Chatted until the bell 6. Feelings toward class & individuals during lesson. Why? #1-4 people drew during break. Most moved around and visited #2-4 kept drawing #3 - No one drawing, during break..all moving around and chatting 7. Feelings after class leaves. Why? Many students finished (or thought they did) by the end of the second pose. Instead of beginning the other model they8cha§£e£ checks. Remarks: Concentration high for 1s t and 2nd poses No one began a 2nd drawing. Students seemed in a hurry to finish. Few used breaks to im-prove drawing. Details are hasty. IT. b-head E x l 2 034 b-head 1 Ex 1 ' 0234 I 1 LEx ] P4_ 123 b-head Ex 12 0 34 - - - -T b-head Exl2 .- -034- -b-head Exl234 a~"l ( b-head 1 1 Exl234 b-head b-head| T .23 T, 1 (waste entire pose #3) ' Ex 1 / 0234! I ~~ ~. Ex 1 Draws entirely from ^ .^ekd . neighbor _ ' ^ e. I _ - - -0-1234. --J23-Z0Zy±_ _| I Ex 14 023 b-head Ex 12 0 34 Beads) 1 1 1 1 1 1 • b-middle Ex 12 0 34 T r b-head Ex 123 04 b-middle Ex 1N 0234 J b-eye Ex 12 034 b-head Ex 1234 W Ex 1234 w Ex 123 04 b-head I Ex 12 034 r b-head Ex 123 04 \ T-4 b-head Ex 1,3 02,4 _ J 119 T E A C H E R L O G ; DATE: November 17, 1981 DIVISION 1__ ASSIGNMENT: Live Model Ex 0 1. 2. 3. 4. refers to model does not refer to model w- completes plan of whole before doing details b - begins with (head, feet, etc.) T - talking and not drawing ss- second start Entrance: Orderly Introduction: Passive at f i r s t , enthusiastic as models are chosen. Most of this class wanted to use soft, art pencils Atmosphere in room: Serious and productive at f i r s t j noisy toward the end Levels of concentration and participation: 9:15 - 9:23 9:33 - 9:38 9:48 - 9:53 9:5? - 10:15 Pose #1 - Excellent concentration. Sett! immediately to work -talking at T-6 in 1 #2 - 9:26 - 9:31 Settled imm. except T #3 - Settled quickly, es concentration be-gins to break down nin. after 2 mins. -6 #4 - took 1 min. to settle. T-6 murmurs entire time, quiet talking throughout room as people finist E valuation- quiet and independent except for T-6 6. Feelings toward class & individuals during lesson. Why? T-6 talked during entire class... spent approx. 7-8 minutes drawing. Breaks were noisy. A lot of visiting. 10 kept drawing during B. #1; 6 drew during B #2 Irritation at number of people who wasted time. 7. Feelings after class leaves. Why? Larger, looser drawings than before. Many finished early. Could have put more into drawings. 8. Spot checks. Remarks: When they talk they, freckle or doodle mechanically. There's more talking as they observe less or ss they revert to familiar drawing symbols | b-head Ex 1 T234 I b-head Exl23 Ex 123 i o4 ~ 0 4 b-shoulder b-pan-Jsl b-head T?v i o*a 01 Ex234 I b-head Ex 123 0 4 b-pants Exl23 04 b-head 01 TI 014 Ex2 Ex23 b-head b-head j Ex 1 0— Ex IO234' TALKING" ~ % T234- - ---~-21234 b-head b-head b-head Ex 1 ^ Ex3 0 1,4 01234 (>234 \ ^  J. gives drawing • \ " lesson . j j J^'head-' ~~ behead" 1 ' 01234——T-4—-^Ex 1 t ' 0234 b-head Ex 12 O34--T-b-pants Ex 12 --034 b-pants' ' b-head 01 4 1 ' Ex 13 Ex 2 3 J j 024—T24— b-shoulderj (ruler) 01234 I b-head Ex 3 0124 T12 _IL_ b-head 012 Ex3 J b-head Ex 13 024 -,01234 -T24 b-head 0123 Ex 4 I b-head Ex 12 0 34 J U b-head Ex 12 034 w Ex 123 04 -J 120 T E A C H E R L O G ti BATE: November 1 6 . 1981 DIVISION ASSIGNMENT: Live model Ex 0 1. 2 . 3 . 4 . refers to model does not refer to model w- completes plan of whole before doing details b - begins with-(head, feet, etc.) T - talking and not drawing ss- second start Entrance: Q u i e t Introduction: A bit lethargic, not very serious during introduction. Only 4 asked for special drawing pencils when offered Atmosphere in room: lethargic at fir s t . . . l a t e r , serious, very purposeful Levels of concentration and participation: 9:15 - 9 : 2 3 9 : 3 3 - 9 : 3 8 9:48 - 9 : 5 3 9 : 59 - 1 0 : 1 7 Pose #1 - a bit slow t settle - absolute si l e after 40-seconds #2 - 9 : 2 6 - 9 : 3 1 - settl< immediately. Good con-rpntptlnr 4, | c e #3 - serious, good concentration 8 - 1 0 students d drawing"during 1 s t & 2 n d breaks #4 - Some whispering a people begin to finish. A l o t of erasing during break and at begin or poses » Some talking during evaluation - 14 returned to work until bell , , . ^ u ^ U w . c h a r 2 i e i Mike is restless, taps eraser constantly, Scott drops things 6. Feelings toward class & individuals during lesson. Vhy? I feel I have to monitor the talking intensely to keep the control on. Most are referring to the model and trying to observe closely. Am pleased with the breaks.. . noise level i s low. Students keep on drawing during breaks, but erase alot at the beginning of next pose 7. Feelings after class leaves. Why? Drawings are looser than f i r s t ones, a lo t larger...some don't f i t on page. 8. Spot checks. Remarks: They are Many stopped drawing by 4th pose...sat, 10 started the other model b-head Exl23 b-head Exl23 b-headI Exl234 ' 2 , 3 . Ib-head 1 E x l 2 3 1 04 1 1 b-head Ex 1 2 3 4 b-feet Exl2 03 b-head Exl234 b-feet") I w T 1 2 3 4 0 1 2 3 4 1 1 0 1 2 3 4 ^ L b-head 1 ss I reads 1 0 1 2 3 4 b-head Exl234 b-head , -T Ex 1 Ex 1 | _ 0 2 3 _023_ I fT-head"' ~ Exl234 (refers to ge^ghbour) b-head b-head Ex 1 2 3 4 J L b-head Ex 1 2 3 4 b-head Exl23 04 JL b-head —T Ex 1 ' b-head Exl234 b-head 0 1 2 3 Ex 4 J I b-head 1 Exl234 L b-head ;0' b-head Ex 1 2 3 b-head Ex 123 0 4 J L b-feet Ex 1 2 3 4 - J 

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:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0095031/manifest

Comment

Related Items