Last Day of Fieldwork

On our last day of fieldwork, we participated in a studio critique of advanced ceramics.  The pieces they had been working on were casts of their hands and forearms and a face that was cast from a mask.  The three elements of both hands and the face were supposed to be cohesive.  There was also an option of making one arm if it started at the shoulder.  The critiquing process started with the student describing their piece, analyzing it in terms of elements and principles of design, interpreting what it means, and a judgement of whether or not it is successful.  Since it is high school, the students talked mostly about their own artwork.  After the student spoke about their piece, the rest of the class was encouraged to give constructive feedback.  The teacher prefers this method and explains that it is the method she was taught when she was a student. 

What we observed was students being very uncomfortable talking about their art in front of their classmates.  None of the students talked about their work in terms of the elements and principles of design, but the teacher didn't seem to stress that anyway.  They seemed to like talking about the interpretation of their work because it helps viewers understand the work when they know the thoughts behind it.  Most students were happy with their work, but one student had a hard time with the feedback given by the teacher.  Her project was not visually cohesive, even though she explained that it represented different aspects of her personality.  The only visual link were different animals that were painted on with glaze.  The animals were stylistically inconsistent, as well as the treatment of the background.  It seemed as if the student didn't have an end result in mind, and only added the animals when the teacher reminded her that they should be consistent.  During the critique, the teacher asked how the piece could be changed to make the parts more cohesive.  Students began to offer ideas and suggestions, but the student being critiqued didn't seem to enjoy this part.  She seemed embarrassed and very uncomfortable.  All of the frustration made her cry after class. 

In Nancy House's article, "Using Critique in the K-12 Classroom," House explains that the difference between art criticism and critique is purpose.  The purpose of critiquing is to evaluate work, assess fulfillment of project objectives, develop critical awareness, and for everyone to learn from each other.  In the case of the ceramics critique, the challenge for the student that became upset was that her project did not meet the objectives that were made clear at the start of the project.    Her piece was not cohesive.  Although there are many methods that could have handled the critique differently, I believe that this critique was successful in determining where the project was lacking.  However, there needs to be a balance of criticism and praise so that the student doesn't become discouraged.  One of the roles of teachers in critiques, as described by House, is to have a balance between being overly responsive and not responsive enough.  In this case, if the teacher were to not address where the project was lacking, there would be a missed opportunity to discuss how the project did not meet the requirement.  There wouldn't be much benefit for the student either, because she would have missed out on the other student's ideas of how it could be improved.  There should have been more praise on what she did, because she left the room crushed and discouraged.  If the class had talked about how her work was successful, she would have had something positive to focus on.  

Nostalgia Lesson

For our lesson in Theory and Practice, Jen and I are working with the theme of nostalgia.  This is an important concept because our memories shape who we are.  As times change, people look back to good memories and values, especially from childhood.  It is not only comforting, looking at the past is a way of telling how far we have come. 
"One must always maintain one's connection to the past and yet ceaselessly pull away from it.  To remain in touch with the past requires a love of memory.  To remain in touch with the past requires a constant imaginative effort"  --Gaston Bachelard

The first artist we explored in our presentation was Greg Simkins. This painting is called Give Me a Name, Bastian!  The painting evokes nostalgic feelings for The NeverEnding Story. 

We asked the class how the artist achieved the feeling of nostalgia.  They responded that the candle and smoke signified memories for them.  The imagery of the characters coming out of the book also made the painting feel like a memory. 


The other artist we explored in our presentation was Aaron Jasinski.  This painting is called Super Mario Brothers.

 The nostalgic memory that Jasinski explores here is a popular video game from the 80's and early 90's.  He chose to use a similar style of Norman Rockwell because Rockwell produced many iconic images of nostalgic memories.  Using Rockwell is also a bit ironic because Rockwell's pieces depicted American life in a simple and idealized way.  Jasinski's subject is more modern, and Rockwell would probably rather see a group of young boys playing basketball than sitting in front of a television. 

The activity in our lesson will involve a writing activity that draws upon the senses.  There is a very powerful connection between the five senses and memory.  A particular smell especially can bring someone back in time and connect them to a specific memory.  We are going to ask the class to think of a fond memory and probably hand out a worksheet to help them brainstorm.   The worksheet will have categories of the senses, where the class will write descriptive words for each sense.  This will be used to help them write a nostalgic poem.  We also want to work with the concept of semiotics and explore how pictures can stand for words.  We are in the process of creating the lesson and figuring out exactly how it will work, but we are excited to see what happens.