Assessing the Visual Arts
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
ASSESSING THE VISUAL ARTS: VALID, RELIABLE, AND ENGAGING STRATEGIES by Alexandria English A Project Submitted to the Faculty of The Evergreen State College In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree Master in Teaching 2010 i ii iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to thank everyone that has helped me on this long journey. An extra thanks to Dr. Terry Ford for reading pages and pages of rough drafts and revisions to get me to this point. Also, thanks to all the faculty members of the MiT program for their dedication and passion for their students. I would especially like to thank my family for their never ending belief and support. Thank you to my fellow cohort members for keeping me focused, motivated, and sane. And of course, thank you, Christopher, for washing dishes and cleaning the house when I was too tired, being my shoulder to cry on, forcing me to have fun when I needed it, and letting me sleep in on those rare weekend mornings. iv ABSTRACT This paper attempts to answer the question what are alternative assessment methods that teachers and students find reliable and valid. To answer this question, this paper discusses the history of art education and examines research that investigated portfolio assessment, self and peer assessment, performance assessment, and teacher and student perceptions of alternative assessment. While there is still more research to be done in the area of visual arts assessment, some conclusions can be drawn from the research investigated here. Portfolio assessment, self and peer assessment, and performance assessment were all found to be reliable methods of assessing students. However, there is more to be discovered in regard to teacher instruction practices and curriculum development. There are also implications for teachers and instructors that plan to use alternative assessment in their classrooms. v TABLE OF CONTENTS TITLE PAGE……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….i SIGNATURE PAGE…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..…iii ABSTRACT……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….iv CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….1 Introduction………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..1 Rationale…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..………..2 Definition of Terms…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..…4 Controversies………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………8 Limitations………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..11 Summary……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..……11 CHAPTER TWO: HISTORICAL BACKGROUND………………………………………………………………………………………….12 Introduction………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………12 The Beginnings of Art Education……………………………………………………………………………………………....12 The Industrial Age……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..13 Turn of the 20th Century………………………………………………………………………………………………..………….14 The Great Depression and the First World War…………………………………………………………………..…….16 The Second World War to the Present Day…………………………………………………………………………..…..17 Students as Human Capital………………………………………………………………………………………………….……21 Summary……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..……26 CHAPTER THREE: CRITICAL REVIEW OF RELEVANT STUDIES………………………………………………………………..…27 Introduction………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………27 Portfolio Assessment………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..28 Summary…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..47 vi Self and Peer Assessment………………………………….………………………………………………………………………47 Summary…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..75 Performance Assessment……………………………………………………….…………………………………………………75 Summary…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..89 Effects of Assessment on Students and Teachers…………………………………….……………………………….90 Summary…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………107 CHAPTER FOUR: CONCLUSIONS…………………………………………………………………………………………………………..108 Introduction……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………108 Summary of Findings…………………………………………………………………………………………………..………….100 Classroom Implications…………………………………………………………………………………………..………………118 Suggestions for Further Research……………………..…………………………………………………………………..122 Conclusions………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….…123 WORKS CITED………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………125 vii CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION Introduction "Significant evidence..." "State content standards..." "Assessment..." "Learning outcomes..." These terms all have the ability to elicit a certain feeling, a sense of numbness or hopelessness from art educators. This reaction is not unique. Many teachers believe that visual art assessment has very little connection with the problems of classroom instruction, classroom curriculum, and classroom management (Beattie, 1997). But it does. Assessment should not be a meaningless task that requires hours of time form teachers. It is a vital part of quality teaching and better instruction. Good classroom practice involves pre- assessing for prior knowledge; building on that prior knowledge through instruction; re- assessing; re-teaching based on assessment findings; and a final assessment. This is an ongoing process that runs concurrent with instruction for the purpose of learning (Beattie, 1997). This includes learning in the visual art classroom. In order to understand student knowledge, learning, and processes, visual art teachers must provide various valid means of assessment to better understand their students thought processes in the arts as well as in other content areas. Research has shown that most teachers spend nearly one half of their work time doing assessment related work (Conklin & Stiggins, 1992). That is quite some time. Understanding assessment and knowing and using effective strategies and procedures can give art educators the tools they need to properly utilize this time and make educated decisions instead of blind guesses. This project explores effective assessment strategies in the visual arts that are valid, reliable, and engaging for students as well as teachers. These strategies include both alternative 1 and standardized forms of assessment. By researching, reviewing, and analyzing these strategies, I can begin to create an effective art assessment program that allows me to continuously discover and monitor student strengths, weaknesses, and progress; improve instructional strategies based on students’ learning; and use different information from students to effectively manage the classroom (Beattie, 1997). Rationale The visual arts can be a gateway to opening a student's soul, give a student a voice, and act as a tool in critically examining the world. But it can also be a source of frustration, separation, and fright. There is a choice that happens in a student's mind when asked to participate in an art activity. He or she can either join in the activity or reject it with the mentality that they are not an artist; they have no talent; they do not have the right personality, background, or knowledge. Now, that choice has been made for the student. Due to the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLBA) as well as Washington state Essential Academic Learning Requirements (EALR) and Grade Level Expectations (GLE), students are required to have an education in the visual arts. Students are also required to show proficiency in these areas based on state performance standards. In recent years, there has been a growing dissatisfaction with the United States’ traditional methods of standardized, multiple choice testing. The result is a growing interest in different forms of alternative assessment at different levels. Educators are discussing portfolios, exhibits, writing and hands-on experiments as new, more effective means of assessment in classroom curriculum (Aschbacher, 1992). The idea of assessment has been unwelcome and unaddressed in arts education for several reasons. According to Eisner (1966), there are five reasons for this. One, visual art assessment is dependent on judgments of the quality and craftsmanship of student work. Some 2 educators see these judgments as blocks in student potential. Judgments can stifle creativity and assessments some art educators see assessments as value judgments. Second, both assessment and evaluation include some form of measurement of student performance. Some art educators believe that the arts should focus on the experience of creating art and that experience cannot be quantified, leaving measurement and the arts incompatible. Third, assessment and evaluation have traditionally been related to the final product or outcomes of the student's efforts. Most art educators regard the process that students engage in to be what is important, not the product. Fourth, many art educators believe that the art field and the desired objectives of art education are anything but standardized. Assessment has been traditionally seen as closely associated with testing and particularly standardized testing. And lastly, assessment and evaluation are closely linked to grading. Some art educators believe that grading, especially at a young age is worse than irrelevant. It is actually considered harmful to the student. So why even look at assessment? Why bother with the struggles that so many other art educators have fought? As Aschbacher (1992) pointed out, assessment can serve needs at all levels of the education hierarchy; for example, assessment helps educators set standards, create instruction pathways, motivate performance, provide diagnostic feedback,