Life is more enriching when one is not centered on self. In one of my personal artist biographies I admit, “Susan is often found conflicted with many ideals of contradiction which often offers fertile ground for her creativity.” As art educators we need to find that center, the context in which we come from, as mentioned in the multiculturalism articles, yet we need to propel our purpose out of self, not disconnected from who we are but refining what we can all evolve into, however there is no destination; we will constantly be changing and hopefully refining ourselves into better humans. In both of the articles I recognized a fluid process to planning, that needs of the student or educator may shift. However, like in aesthetics we need a foundation or criteria to keep us on course with social justice and service learning.
In Elizabeth Garber’s article she characterizes the teacher’s social justice role in education as empowering teachers as “leaders capable of contributing to a social change and justice both inside and outside of schools provides a basis for belief in the possibility of social justice.” Students will have experiences that they can take beyond the classroom. She weighs “the importance of teachers seeing themselves as intellectuals- that is, as professionals able to conceptualize, design, and implement ideas and experiences in educating students- rather than as technicians implementing prepackaged content and instructional procedures… teachers are able to determine content that validates their student’s bases of understanding and experiences.” This is only possible if the educator is intune with their personal enrichment and flexible in their own life experiences and response to the world that surrounds them and the students they educate. Taylor reinforces the ever changing shifts and response that is necessary in social justice and service minded theory by stating that the keystone to service-learning pedagogy is reflection. “Service-learning students, teachers, and community participants are actively involved in the constant production and reproduction of the service project through reflective discourse, writing, exhibition, and critique” Through this vital reevaluation, “service-learning theory and language are also constantly reflected upon, reconsidered and altered.” To reaffirm this, Taylor defines that  a service-learning project must be a continually evolving process to be considered a postmodern work of art, and that even when the course or semester is over, the service -learning project is never completed, re affirming that like our own theories we must continue to evolve and refine our response to the world around us and the way we educate.
I often say, if I think I know all the answers, I am in trouble. I also know that listening is often more effective than pressing my point of view. In the case of social justice and service-learning, I have often been surrounded by strong points of view, taught in ubran, inner city, or underprivileged-at-risk students, while our family qualified for “underprivileged” assistance programs. I have people in my life that are a contrast to my thinking. There is a necessity in acceptance, willing to learn from the differences, but looking for the similarities. If we focus on what is different or wrong we will never meet on the common ground. 
As we began class one day,”do you think you are going to be asked about what standards you teach, what you teach?” Most of us looked blankly. We were then told our art program is ours, what we choose to teach is our program, we must own it. As much as that gives us freedom it comes with responsibility. We will need to continually inform ourselves if social justice becomes part of the curriculum we choose to focus on. Service-learning vital to a wholesome human experience, it can only enhance the lives we touch and educate. 

“Service-Learning as a Postmodern Art and Pedagogy”, Pamela G. Taylor (2002)
“Social Justice and Art Education”, Elizabeth Garber (2004)

​

I consider the art history, materials, level of difficulty when planning or teaching a lesson. I plan for grades K-8 so my breadth of projects is larger than the chunks of K-5, 6-8, or 9-12. I never thought I would have been called to teach younger children but it just seems to be the way I have been guided. I hear from our Kindergarten and 1st grade teacher that her students were very disappointed that they couldn’t have art everyday. The day after the first day of art this year, the students were sad that they would have to wait a whole week. I enjoy the teaching of adults, and how they can be self directed but often they can also have similar challenges as little children because we all have an inherent need to be heard or understood, especially when we need assistance. 

Before a lesson I scan the room and troubleshoot. What equipment will I need? what might distract the students? What area of the room needs to be focused on or drawn away from? What materials need to be out? What needs to be inaccessible? 
​
I consider my ability and materials available to me. I may connect the content to the bible passage of the school year (we are parochial, this year courage, firm, strong, and all things in love...) or to the lesson the music curriculum is studying. For expressionism we used Prokofiev”s Peter and the Wolf, connecting sounds of the instruments, to a visual of the instrument, and to perhaps the emotion, energy or movement that sound might have (what it might look like). I try to make as many connections to the world that surrounds the project so even if one element, "like my sister plays the flute and that is like a bird sound", the child can take that learning beyond the classroom.

​

The theory and practice behind visual culture based art education is an interesting approach to teaching and engaging students in the visual arts. The three articles used to bring these theories to light and for review and reflection, encouraged and argued how crucial the use and importance of critical thinking, like other theories, is for students.
In the article The Disconnect Between Theory and Practice in a Visual Culture Approach to Art Education, Rebekka Herrmann cautions multiple times that visual culture art education if not carefully implemented thoughtfully considered may become “teacher directed without research or inquiry on the part of the student”, “the student is again forced into a teacher determined product”, or “Even though questioning and discussion occurs, the lesson is teacher directed and guided toward a particular end on which the artmaking project is based”.
I found some if not most Herrmann’s arguments contradictory. In placing responsibility into the hands of the students to discover an idea “worth investigating” requires the art teacher to have the knowledge and ability to LEAD discussions and engage students in a meaningful investigation. “They must also have enough knowledge of art history and contemporary art to present meaningful examples of artists who have dealt with similar issues in a variety of ways.” It would seem in her argument to “provide opportunities for investigation and research that can result in artmaking rather than focusing primarily on technical skill acquisition” is limited. Why can’t there also be skill acquisition? In her argument it seems that the art teacher still controls the outcome, which is ultimately the purpose of an educator, to instruct and teach. It seems her concerns are in the teacher’s control of ideas, and it is difficult to define, however I do agree that we need to empower the students with a more meaningful approach to the contemporary art world as she states.
The approach from Arthur D. Efland’s article, Problems Confronting Visual Culture, was a bit more palatable. Not wanting to divorce oneself completely from fine art studies (technical acquisition, art history, formalism), recognized again that “works of fine art play their principal role. They belong in the art education curriculum, not to give us aesthetic experiences, though they do that well, but to remind us of our human potential.” Authur also cautions that visual culture will experience growing pains like any new movement, in “its excessive breadth since the number of genres covered by programs in visual culture can be so enormous as to become unmanageable in the time allotted for teaching the arts”. He explained the postmodern era defined by Arthur Danto, “One zone is the art world where the fine arts serve as it’s main preoccupation, while the other regions include the mass media and the popular culture… Boundaries that once kept these zones apart have either disappeared or are in the process of erasure”. Acknowledgment of the changes that occur is extremely important, it would seem evermore important for a contemporary and future art educator to be well versed in art history.
Written in 1997, I found the article, Art Education for New Times, by Paul Duncum 
fascinating. I tried to place myself into the year 1997 and how technology affected my life personally. A mere three years earlier email was simply, a black screen, with white text. Duncum does not warn but informs readers that, “ it is crucial for art education to acknowledge that while visual communication survives, it has changed it’s form. Imagery is now infinitely more plentiful, pervasive, immediate, and ephemerial, than ever before. And proponents of the information highway promise a high level of interactivity.”
As discussed in our topics of advocacy, aesthetics, multiculturalism, and now visual culture the primary goal of education in the arts is to encourage critical thinking, while creating a structure in which creative learning can occur. In my instruction I embrace flexibility, willingness, and openness and search to find balance in theories that all seem to have some validity. We need to acknowledge the interrupting nature of visual/ mass media/ information highway noise and find a place for it in the education of art, but in balance with the foundation of art history, manipulation of materials, and critical thinking skills.

​

Last week I put together a lesson on the fly. Lunch lady land crossed over into art making world. In our lunch program we (at one time) used straws and a broken dispenser. So when the children would push the lever for the straw, thirty would come out, there would be a scramble every time to catch them and look at them and say? What do I do with these?? The straws would have been touched so they were tossed. It was a frustration that early on I just got rid of them in the serving line. Approximately 40 boxes of 200 straws (most likely a whole case) sat. I tried to brainstorm what could possibly be done, these were straws I had not ordered, and to throw them away seemed wrong, and with all the controversy over straws and the oceans... I decided the best bet was try to put them through one use, creativity. 
So together with the 4th through 8th grade, I supplied them with stiff ribbon, low temp hot glue, and as many straws as they wanted. I encouraged them to research (outside of class) straw art, and come back with ideas. Not surprising many geometric forms came out of their hands. We had been working on a lot of formal drawing this winter so it was a good chance for them to experiment and practice ingenuity. They also learned strength and weakness in structure building. 

A few weeks ago I shared the work of Georgia O'Keefe with the 2nd and 3rd graders and introduced using a view finder. This week with the kindergarten and 1st graders we read My Name is Georgia by Jeanette Winter. The younger students did not use view finders but they did select a flower photo to copy a picture of what they observed. I told them to pay attention to the color, texture, and the shape of the petals. I was so thrilled with how hard they worked. There were some pretty amazing results in looking and seeing! 

Today Esther and Kathleen completed their scarves. It was much celebration. Nothing makes me happier than teaching the things I love and passing that knowledge on to others. 

Yesterday we studied Robert Indiana's sculptures of love and hope, we learned that he was an American Artist that was an influencer in the Pop Art Movement. One of the main focuses of pop art is the design element (Andy Warhol's Campbell's Soup Cans, Brillo Soap Pads) . After our critique of previous name design project, the students were given basic guidelines; a card for each letter of their name, and a background in which to place it. The children designed letters to make up their names. They practiced filling a square with a letter in their sketchbook before attempting the project.

Weeks ago the 2nd and 3rd grade students created a design of their name with stencils, scrap paper, markers. Focusing on their name and thinking about design, after a time and really feeling the need to push aesthetics in the classroom. I found courage and hosted a critique. As a group we gave every child an opportunity to show their work and the class raised their hands and we discussed at least three things they liked about their fellows work. I may have asked the student about their own work and what they might have changed, but for an initial critique it went well. Students learned what critique means, they learned about texture, movement, color, and shape among some of the terms we used. The project we used was great for this exercise, simple and based on their name, something they could execute fairly simple. Some of the things said, " I like all the colors they used to fill their name." " I like the way they made a lot of scribbles." "I like the way they arranged their letters."

Multiculturalism inclusion in education is extremely important. In the 21st century with almost all knowledge at the tips of our fingers, on our phones, on our laptops, chromebooks, or computers, educating our students in factual, discretionary, curriculum has a greater importance now more than ever. Through social media the naive may perceive something gone viral as fact, this could cross into reaffirming stereotypes, and fostering ignorance. 
In Harold Best’s article Lemonade or Merlot? Authentic Multiculturalism and High Culture he focuses on the need to teach tradition and foundations in arts education but also, implies that multicultural diversity in other cultures only adds to the depth of education in the arts, when taught with a wholesome and all in inclusive view of diversity. He says, “I want to show them that it is possible to like one thing more than another while loving both.” Though formalist in the foundation of Best’s article, his multicultural desire to inform has the components of the Multicultural and Social Reconstructionist approach to arts education. In Patricia Stuhr’s article, “ The reconstructionist’s approach educates students to become critical thinkers capable of examining their life experiences and the social divisions that keep them and their group from fully enjoying the social and economic rewards of the United States” ( Grant & Sleeter, 1993). Best also defines four principles in reconstructive teaching that brings students to fuller aesthetic, spiritual, and intellectual learning. Defining one’s centeredness, knowing widely and evaluating accordingly, the difference between intrinsic worth and relative value, and differences in kind make room for the allowance of differences in a quality among kinds (aesthetics, and the means by which we categorize our experiences). A response to art may differ but we need to allow for differences within context, media, culture, etc, and aesthetics is a tool in which we can “measure” our response and understanding of our experience.
I was reminded of my own whiteness when I read the study, Constructing an Image of a White Teacher by Alice Mcintyre. The foundation of my art education journey began in Milwaukee. I did a practicum in inner city schools and was a resident teaching artist in the urban environment. My children went to an inner city school. My husband was a teacher in an inner city school. That being said, three years removed from that environment, my experience has faded. I’ve become complacent. This article was a reminder and I could relate to the problem I faced as a “white knight” in the inner city. There is potential to turn ourselves into the all caring patriarchal role which separates us from the students. Fighting battle fronts white teachers don’t understand in a black world, initially, and as in this study particularly, student teachers. “They failed to realize that no amount of caring-if it is not linked to some possibility of change, is going to dismantle the foundations of racism that hold our schools intact. The participants paternalism, along with some of the teaching they observed, mutes the critical discussion of racism and teaching.”(674)  Often we find ourselves in situations that “no matter how much or how little they had already acknowledged the role race played in their lives and the lives of others, there had still been too little acknowledgement of it and too much silence about it.”(664) In a classroom and actively teaching/observing in that environment, you can learn the most about the subtle variations or glaringly obvious differences in our whiteness and culture vs. the inner city or urban environment. This study was a good introduction to an area of teaching that does often have “too much silence” about it. I feel that multiculturalism and the issue of race are related, but do deserve a closer look together and as well as separate.




​I