I had an interesting realization at work this week. I work at a Middle School art room and was helping with Art Club, which is held after school. As I helped set up the fused glass art project students filled the room with anticipation and excitment. Two boys in particular set up their work station and got to work right away. They were experimenting with some new glass cutting techniques that they had considered after the last club meeting and couldn’t wait to try. As they worked on their masterpieces they only looked up to answer questions from other students.
I commented to the teacher after club how impressed I was with the skill level of some of the kids and their total engagement with the project. She explained that one of those boys that I had described was actually really struggling in his art class. She thought that is was because the work in the class was not technical and challenging enough for him.
As teachers I think that we can get caught up with our learning objectives and goals instead of being more adaptable to the individual needs of students. We underestimate the ability of young people to do more complicated and technical projects sometimes, which can lead to boredom in the classroom. How can we design programs to keep children engaged and on the edges of their seats? How can the University better prepare its future teachers to create more dynamic classrooms? What mentors can we turn to that will inspire us to take our teaching to a new generation of learners?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Thank you for your thought provoking post. I agree with you Bonnie, that many teachers "get caught up in learning objectives and goals instead of being more adaptable to individual needs of students".
ReplyDeleteAs far as your questions about inpiration, it is my impression that new constructivist concepts and ideas about learning communities are geared toward involving the students in co-constructing what they would like to get out of their classes.
I hear much of this language being used - but have thus far seen few real-life applications of the theory. However, I do have faith in the potential for art education to be progressive in its instructional delivery. It seems that the more students are able to pursue their individual interests the more engaged and motivated they are.
The more we accept that each student is starting to construct their knowledge from a different starting point, the better able we are to acknowledge individual progress without applying a universal measuring stick.
Fortunately, art allows for more than one correct answer, multiple opportunities for creative problem solving, and opportunities for ambiguity and communication.
Perhaps, if we decentralize ourselves from the position of expert, from always being the central figure in the classroom, can we fascilitate the opportunity to be inspired by the students and allow the students to inspire each other?
Thanks for the post. I really agree that I will definitely struggle at first with the atmosphere in the classroom. How will I be able to keep the children engaged? I believe that we need to see what kind of classroom we will have first and then adapt around it. Find out from the children what they want to do. I would love to get student input and then hopefully try to accommodate everyone's wants and needs.
ReplyDelete