The "extra layer" for holistic teaching
How do Art and crafts teachers teach in order to provide students with experience of observational and representational drawing?
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.7577/formakademisk.3823Keywords:
Art and crafts, drawing, drawing education, learning outcomes, curriculumAbstract
The article explores how Art and crafts teachers in lower secondary school teach in order to provide students with experience of observational and representational drawing. The study is a qualitative case study based on observations, interviews with teachers and the study of student assignments. The study is based on Tyler’s (1949) theory of learning experience, and Eisner’s (1979) theory of learning outcomes provides the basis for analysis of the teaching of drawing. The results show that teachers planned for students to experience a combination of observational drawing and representational drawing, with learning experiences characterized by continuity, order and integration (Tyler, 1949). Although teachers do not perceive that the curriculum in Art and crafts in LK06 emphasises representational drawing in competence objective at secondary level, they facilitate an open learning outcome. They do this on the basis that they see the value of the students' imagination, fantasy and creativity, where the students can experience the unforeseen in working with drawing in addition to predefined goals.
References
Andreassen, S.-E. (2016). Forstår vi læreplanen? [Doktoravhandling, Universitetet i Tromsø - Norges arktiske universitet]. https://munin.uit.no/bitstream/handle/10037/9671/thesis_entire.pdf?sequence=3
Brænne, K. (2011). Vedlikehald av ein konstruert kontrovers - kunstpedagogikk og handverkstradisjon i kunst- og handverksfaget. FormAkademisk - forskningstidsskrift for design og designdidaktikk, 4(2). https://doi.org/10.7577/formakademisk.203
Bull-Hansen, R. (1959). Formingsfagene i dagens skole. Forming, Tidsskrift for formingsarbeid og kunst i skolen (3), 3-6.
Eisner, E. W. (1979). The Educational Imagination: On the Design and Evaluation of School Programs. Macmillan Publishing.
Eisner, E. W. (1984). The Art and Craft of Teaching. I J. Reinhartz (Ed.), Perspectives on Effective Teaching and the Cooperative Classroom (ss. 19-31). National Education Association of the United States. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED250279.pdf.
Eisner, E. W. (1991). The Enlightened Eye: Qualitative Inquiry and the Enhancement of Educational Practice. Macmillan Publishing Company.
Engelsen, B. U. (2015). Kan læring planlegges? Arbeid med læreplaner - hva, hvordan, hvorfor? (7. utg.). Gyldendal Akademisk.
Fauskanger, J. & Mosvold, R. (2014). Innholdsanalysens muligheter i utdanningsforskning. Norsk pedagogisk tidsskrift, 98(2). https://doi.org/10.18261/ISSN1504-2987-2014-02-07
Framgard, E. (2020). Bilde og betydningsprodukasjon i Undersøkende praksis - en pedagogisk bildepraksis. [Doktoravhandling, Universitetet i Oslo]. https://www.uv.uio.no/forskning/aktuelt/arrangementer/disputaser/var-2020/iped/bilde-og-bet.prod-2020-erlingframgard.pdf
Frisch, N. S. (2003). «Se tennene!»: Barnetegning - en skatt og et slags spor: En sosiokulturell analyse av barns tegneprosesser i barnehagen. Høgskolen i Nesna. https://www.nb.no/items/URN:NBN:no-nb_digibok_2013022606007
Frisch, N. S. (2010). To see the visually controlled: Seeing-drawing in formal and informal contexts [Doktoravhandling,. NTNU - Norges teknisk-naturvitenskapelige universitet]. https://ntnuopen.ntnu.no/ntnu-xmlui/handle/11250/270213
Frisch, N. S. (2011). Ways of talking about drawing practices. Sociocultural views: Gombrich and visually controlled drawing. FormAkademisk - forskningstidsskrift for design og designdidaktikk, 4(2). https://doi.org/10.7577/formakademisk.199
Frisch, N. S. (2013). Hekta på tegning: Løpeildeffekten som læring. I N. S. Frisch (Red.), Tegningen lever! Nye dialogiske perspektiver på tegneundervisning i grunnskolen. Akademika forlag.
Goodlad, J. I., Klein, M. F. & Tye, K. A. (1979). The Domains of Curriculum and Their Study. In J. I. Goodlad (Ed.), Curriculum Inquiry: The Study of Curriculum Practice (pp. 43-76). McGraw-Hill.
Gundem, B. B. (2011). Europeisk didaktikk: Tenkning og viten. Universitetsforlaget.
Illeris, H. (2002). Billede, pædagogik og magt: postmoderne optikker i det billedpædagogiske felt. Samfundslitteratur.
Jacobsen, D. I. (2005). Hvordan gjennomføre undersøkelser? Innføring i samfunnsvitenskapelig metode. Høyskoleforlaget.
Kjosavik, S. (2001). Fra tegning, sløyd og håndarbeid til Kunst og håndverk: en faghistorie gjennom 150 år. Tell Forlag.
Kvale, S., Brinkmann, S., Anderssen, T.M. & Rygge, J. (2015). Det kvalitative forskningsintervju (3. utg.). Gyldendal Akademisk.
Lutnæs, E. (2011). Standpunktvurdering i grunnskolefaget Kunst og håndverk. Læreres forhandlingsrepertoar. [Doktoravhandling, Arkitektur- og designhøgskolen i Oslo]. https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/52039953.pdf
Nielsen, L. M. (2009). Fagdidaktikk for Kunst og håndverk. I går, i dag, i morgen. Universitetsforlaget.
Nielsen, L. M. (2014). Debunking teacher's resistant to teaching children to draw - a companion to citizenship for the future. Techne Serien - Forskning i slöjdpedagogik och slöjdvetenskap 21(2), 34-42. https://journals.hioa.no/index.php/techneA/article/view/1264/1131
Oltedal, E., Gamlem, S. M., Kleivenes, O. M., Ryslett, K. & Vasset, T. (2016). Teachers' assessment experiences and perceptions in the practical-aesthetic subjects. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 60(6), 649-662. https://doi.org/10.1080/00313831.2015.1066431
Omtveit, B. (2011). Teikning: hand og tanke. Ei undersøking av teikneundervisninga på faglærerutdanninga. [Masteravhandling, Høgskolen i Oslo]. https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/35073457.pdf
Postholm, M. B. (2010). Kvalitativ metode: En innføring med fokus på fenomenologi, etnografi og kasusstudier (2. utg.). Universitetsforlaget.
Prøitz, T. S. (2015). Læringsutbytte. Universitetsforlaget.
Prøitz, T. S. (2013). Variations in grading practice - subjects matter. Education Inquiry, 4(3). https://doi.org/10.3402/edui.v4i3.22629
Skjelbred, B. H. & Borgen, J. S. (2019). Ungdomsskolelæreres oppfatninger av tegning sett i lys av den grunnleggende ferdigheten «å skrive» i Kunst og håndverk. Acta Didactica Norge, 13(1). https://doi.org/10.5617/adno.6438
Skjelbred, B. H. & Borgen, J. S. (2020). Tegning og didaktiske praksiser i Kunst og håndverk. Techne Serien - Forskning i slöjdpedagogik och slöjdvetenskap, 27(1), 20-35. https://journals.oslomet.no/index.php/techneA/article/view/3461
Stavnås, C. C. M. & Nielsen, L. M. (2015). Tegning og fagspråk - et kritisk blikk på lærebøker i tegning som benyttes i faglærerutdanning. FormAkademisk - forskningstidsskrift for design og designdidaktikk, 8(3). https://doi.org/10.7577/formakademisk.1561
Tjora, A. (2017). Kvalitative forskningsmetoder i praksis. (3. utgave). Gyldendal Norsk Forlag.
Tyler, R. W. (1949). Basic Principles of Curriculum and Instruction. Gyldendal Akademisk.
Utdanningsdirektoratet. (2020). Innføring av nye læreplaner. https://www.udir.no/laring-og-trivsel/lareplanverket/fagfornyelsen/innforing-av-nye-lareplaner/
Utdanningsdirektoratet. (2006). Læreplan i Kunst og håndverk (KL06). https://www.udir.no/kl06/KHV1-01
Utdanningsdirektoratet. (2020). Læreplan i Kunst og håndverk (KHV01-02). https://www.udir.no/lk20/khv01-02.
Yin, R. K. (2017). Case study research and applications: Design and methods. SAGE Publications.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2021 Bente Helen Skjelbred
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
- The author(s) must manage their economic reproduction rights to any third party.
- The journal makes no financial or other compensation for submissions, unless a separate agreement regarding this matter has been made with the author(s).
- The journal is obliged to archive the manuscript (including metadata) in its originally published digital form for at least a suitable amount of time in which the manuscript can be accessed via a long-term archive for digital material, such as in the Norwegian universities’ institutional archives within the framework of the NORA partnership.
Readers of the journal can print out the published manuscripts under the same conditions as apply to the reproduction of physical copies.
Cited by
