special population and 3 on barnes || give students with special needs something to talk about

National Art Education Association

Give Students with Special Needs Something to Talk AboutAuthor(s): Marjorie SchillerSource: Art Education, Vol. 47, No. 6, Special Population and 3 on Barnes (Nov., 1994), pp. 12-15Published by: National Art Education AssociationStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3193459 .

Accessed: 15/06/2014 14:16

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

National Art Education Association is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to ArtEducation.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 188.72.126.181 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 14:16:22 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=naea

http://www.jstor.org/stable/3193459?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


BY MARJORIE SCHILLER

Give Students with Special Needs

ut we have no time for art; our Individual Education Plans are full of objectives

already; we have to concentrate on life skills; art history will have no meaning to our students." These arguments against including content-rich art activities within special education curricula were offered during an introduction to discipline-based art education in an art methods course for elementary teachers, offered at a large midwestern university, and designed to meet the specific needs of future teachers of special education. These future teachers had some trouble regarding art as a subject of study for special education students. They appeared to regard art as a free time activity. Initial written expectations of this particular class included having fun, learning to tie-dye, and learning some foolproof art media projects to use as time-filler or reward activities. As a former special education teacher and current art educator at the university level, I felt a keen sense

of dismay when I learned of the prevail- ing attitudes of these preservice teachers.

Art lessons that are content-rich, in that they include concepts in art history, criticism and aesthetics, can pro- mote the use of oral and written language, as well as addressing specific art learning. Written and oral language practice is an essential curriculum area for many students in special education. Content-rich art lessons not only can satisfy calls for more language experience on the part of children with special needs, but can provide a familiar medi- um for students in special education.

Although all students might benefit from the language practice that art lessons can provide, students in special education can derive particular benefits from talking about art-related activity.

This paper is intended to provide an argument for including such activities within the special education curriculum core.

Several recent articles in art education journals have described the positive experiences that content-rich art classes can provide for students with

special needs. Blandy (1989), for example, refers to the normalizing effects that can be achieved through stressing an ecological approach to teaching art. In this approach, an art teacher consid- ers "the individual student's abilities and the interrelationship of those abilities with the significant others in the student's life, the student's cultural and social background, and the student's environment" (p. 9). Blandy, Pancsofar, and Mockensturm (1988) have suggested guidelines for teaching art to students with significant mental and/or physical challenges. These guidelines include teaching students with disabilities to address problems and concerns in studio, criticism, aesthetics, and art history, just as other students would, but in a developmentally appropriate manner. Cowan and Clover (1990) document the power of discipline-based art lessons to enhance self-concept in some children. Several of the students described in the article were students in special education. While Cowan and Clover advocate a model of DBAE that includes teaching

- | ARART EDUCATION / NOVEMBER 1994



from each of the four disciplines during every art lesson, a somewhat less struc- tured approach might be used as well.

Two Canadian art educators describe a program of learning through visual arts that focuses on developing a positive self-concept, increasing organi- zational and listening skills, following directions, and providing opportunities for language development (Goebel & Gowland, 1982). Although the Canadian program predates the devel-

plines of art criticism, art history, and aesthetics. Students usually participate in discussion during the study of aesthetics and criticism. Many proponents of the discipline-based art approach suggest that the structure of aesthetic scanning (Broudy, 1984) is a useful tool to help students begin to use art vocabulary. Others see criticism as an appropriate opening to the study of art (Barrett, 1989).

Art lessons that strive to achieve an

Something to Talk About

of DBAE within seven special education classrooms (Schiller, 1990). Much of the content focused on written and oral language development in the con- text of art lessons. Special education teachers volunteered to participate in the project that included attending a full day workshop, developing and teaching an art unit involving quilt-making, and discussing various elements of the study with the project leader. Although most of the seven teachers used art pro- duction activities in their classrooms, none of the teachers had previous experience with using art as a vehicle for stimulating practice in oral and written language.

The following vignettes describe three of the teachers, their classrooms, and their comments on language learning and use that took place in their classrooms as a result of participating in this study.

opment of DBAE, there appear to be similarities between the two, in the emphasis that is placed on learning and talking about art, as well as creating it.

Although there is a history of references to art as a valuable therapeutic process for children with special needs (see for example Kramer, 1972; Anderson, 1978; Uhlin & DeChaira, 1982), the emphasis has been on emotional development and media skill acquisition rather than developing an understanding of art through the acquisition of appropriate language. If content-rich art education is to be taken seriously as an academic area within special education, a reasonable argument is needed for its inclusion. The link between language development and art should be highlighted as an important aspect of lesson objectives.

Language learning and practice in art class is an integral part of the disci-

understanding of art include talking and writing about art. Children are motivated to become involved in dis- cussions because they are excited by the visual stimulation of works of art. Most artworks contain clues that can be easier to "read" than textbooks in other classes. A print can be analyzed by its colors, lines, mood, subject, and so forth, giving the describer alterna- tive means for joining a discussion. Works of art may be discussed from positions ranging from the literal to the symbolic, with diverse opinions encour- aged rather than rejected.

Children may learn to venture opinions in an accepting atmosphere, one that promotes the development and practice of language.

In 1990, a staff development program was developed to explore the use

A SPEECH PATHOLOGIST'S PERSPECTIVE

Dora has been a speech pathologist for three years. She works in an elementary school of 300 students and provides service to children who are experiencing difficulty with speech and language development. Part of Dora's work involves afternoon team-teaching in a self-contained classroom of children with severe speech and language delays. There were nine children in the class, and Dora had selected them to be the participants in her quilt-making lessons. Dora's unit on quilt-making was integrated with a social studies unit on transportation, and a math unit on geometric shapes. The quit was to contain representations of vehicles con- structed of geometric shapes. When asked about the strengths of the quilt- making unit Dora offered:

By doing art projects, I can see, com- ingfrom a language perspective, how advantageous it is to do these kinds of

NOVEMBER 1994 / ART EDUCATION



activities. I saw a lot of spontaneous and complex language going on with these kids during the unit. It was a whole new way to get at some of the concepts that I'm trying to teach.

Dora also commented on a writing activity initiated by the children.

We started at 12:45, sitting here and putting the pictures in order [a construc- tion paper model of the quilt] and talked about the steps. Then they went right over to the computer and they all just sat there and gave their teacher the idea to type it into the computer. When I came back, forty-five minutes later they were still working on it.

The class decided to make an illus- trated book that described their quilt- making experience. Dora then described an oral language activity that she was inspired to lead as a result of the quilt making.

I put up a Picasso (Two people and a Dog in the Sun) and then we went around the room and talked about what they thought it was. Each one of them had something different to say. Most of the time one of them will say something and the rest of them will say "me too"I was impressed because this time they all saw something different. Then I told them the name of the picture and they each came up and talked about where they thought the people and the dog were, and they still had different ideas. They thought it was funny that that is what it was called, and we talked about abstract art a little bit. Then we went through the shapes and colors, actually we neverfin- ished. It took longer than a half an hour.

In her closing comments Dora had one last reflection in comparing her quilting unit with the way she had taught similar content in past years.

I saw an amazing difference in the amount that these kids learned and were

able to retain and able to use sponta- neously... they were submerged in the vocabulary and the concepts.

TEACHING CHILDREN WITH BEHAVIOR PROBLEMS

Carol is a teacher of elementary- aged children with emotional handicaps and behavior disorders. She has been teaching in public schools for seven years. Her classroom is a warm and colorful place with books, toys, two computers, and other materials available for student use.

There were twelve students in Carol's class ranging from first to third grade. Carol and her class decided to make a "monster quilt." Their idea came from the popular children's book 'Where the Wild Things Are," by Maurice Sendak (1963). Carol is accus- tomed to using children's literature as an introduction to units of study. Her introduction to quilts was through the children's book, 'The Patchwork Cat" by Nicola Bayley (1981). Thus, she initiated a connection between art and written language.

When asked about her experiences in teaching the creating of the "monster quilt", Carol talked about the following introductory activities:

'The Patchwork Cat" is the story that I read to them, and then from there we talked about our own quilting project. I brought in quilts from home and we analyzed them as we looked at them. We talked about shapes, lines, and that kind of thing, and color... and the kids really enjoyed this activity. From there we had a long discussion about our own design ... we took afew days just to brainstorm ... Do wego with a theme or a shape idea? And then the idea of doing a monster quilt came up.

Later in the discussion, Carol was asked about the strengths of the quilting project. She described some typical

behaviors of children with behavior disorders and emotional handicaps and how the quilting project provided an arena for verbal communication and cooperation.

So many times the kids are brought to this classroom because they can'tget along with their peers, they can'tget along with their teachers, you know on the playground... They need more time to work on things like cooperation ... I think that it (the quilt project) gave us the opportunity to work ^ cooperatively in decision making, and

sharing. We talked about math in mea- suring and dividing things evenly. The group decision-making, sharing and negotiating with each other was the most important thing about the quilt project, I think.

TEACHING OLDER STUDENTS Beth is a teacher of high school-

aged students with developmental delays. Maria, a speech therapist, team teaches with Beth every afternoon. Beth has been a special education teacher for thirteen years and Maria has been a speech therapist for four. Both teachers are interested in art but were uncertain about how to integrate it with their on-going curriculum. Their students range in age from 14 to 22, and range in abilities as well. In this inter-

_| ARART EDUCATION / NOVEMBER 1994



view excerpt, Beth shared the introductory activities of the quiltmaking unit

We started with a quilt that we bor- rowed. We talked about the story that it could tell. Then we talked about our quilt and all the stories that we could tell about ourstate that we had learned in our social studies units.

Maria spoke of her reactions to the quilt project, especially the language that was generated.

What I learned was how effective it (the quilt project) was with this age group, and this particular population. Especially from the language perspective, all the different kinds of communication that went on was really neat to see. For example, working on the quilt the kids went off into different small groups, and each group had to design their own square. Just the planning and deciding what colors to use, what shapes, what objects, all that stuff they had to work out together. It was really interesting to see the language that was going on.

She also talked about the rights of her students:

Beth and I talk a lot about what hap- pens to our kids when they get to high school. The focus is on vocation. We have been criticizedfor things we do in

the classroom that are not justfocused on vocation. But in our minds we were exposing them to things that are going on out in the world, and making them well rounded people. They have that right, they have the right to know what's going on in the world. So I think when we talk about art we're giving them that, and showing them what's out there, and exposing them to things they otherwise wouldn't be exposed to.

Maria is planning art experiences for her future classes. As she plans, these are her thoughts:

I really want to tie in the written language and reading, so we would read information about an artist and the kids could write in a journal. If we study different types of art, maybe we could com- pare and contrast, and make notes.

CONCLUSION These teachers have found, through

art, an avenue for language development in their classrooms. Many of the teachers who participated in the project identified a need to communicate more often and effectively with the district's art specialist. Several teachers had begun to outline complex plans for the future that included talking about art and artists, using art to experience other than mainstream culture, and going on field trips to local art muse- ums.

The teachers in this study developed art lessons that provided personal and meaningful motivation to language learning. The children in these classes received instruction in art on more than a superficial level, as well. All seven teachers in the staff development project are convinced that art should be more than a free-time activity in the special education classroom.

Marjorie Schiller is Assistant Professor in Art Education, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH.

REFERENCES Anderson, F. (1978). Artfor all the children.

Springfield IL Charles C. Thomas. Barrett, T. (1989). A consideration of criti-

cism. Journal of Aesthetic Education, 23(4), 23-35.

Bayley, N. (1981). The patchwork cat. New York: Knopf.

Blandy, D. (1989). Ecological and normalizing approaches to disabled students and art education. Art Education, 42(3), 7-11.

Blandy, D., Pancsofar, E., & Mockensturm, T. (1988). Guidelines for teaching art to children and youth experiencing significant mental/physical challenges. Art Education, 41(1), 60-66.

Broudy, H. (1983). A common curriculum in aesthetics and fine arts. In G. Fenstermacher &J. Goodlad (Eds.). Individual differences and the common curriculum (p. 219-247). 82nd Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education. Chicago, IL University of Chicago Press.

Cowan, M. & Clover, F. (1990). Enhancement of self-concept through discipline-based art education. Art Education, 43(2), 3845.

Goebel, A. & Gowland, D. (1982). One approach to art in special education. Education Canada, 22(1), 20-24.

Kramer, E. (1971). Art as therapy with children. New York: Schocken.

Schiller, M. (1990). An interpretive study of teacher change during staff development with teachers of special education. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ.

Sendak, M. (1963). Where the wild things are. New York: Harper & Row.

Uhlin, D. & DeChaira, E. (1982). Artfor excep- tional children (3rd ed.). Dubuque, IA: Wm. C. Brown.

NOVEMBER 1994 / ART EDUCATION



special population and 3 on barnes || give students with special needs something to talk about

Documents