The International Journal of the Arts in Society: Annual Review

Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Subscription Access
Open Access Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Restricted Access Subscription Access

Multidiscipline-Based Art Education Model: A Possible Way for Improving the Quality of Teaching Art


Affiliations
1 Sultan Qaboos University, Oman
     

   Subscribe/Renew Journal


It has been seen that teaching art education has taken different directions and multifaceted approaches. Many factors have played a direct or indirect role in shaping current trends in art education. It has an important role to play in the constructive transformation of educational systems that are struggling to meet the needs of learners in a rapidly changing world. However, this article argues that art education alone cannot resolve world challenges and problems. It assumes that good discipline of art education alone will never be good enough. It is enhanced by successful partnerships between related disciplines and strong relationships. As a result, art education today requires a comprehensive model to include all aspects of learners' development such as the creative, cognitive, emotional, aesthetic, social and other related aspects of children, young people and life-long learners. This theoretical article attempts to provide a general historical review of the best-known models in art education in chronological order and to suggest a model for improving the quality of teaching art which is based on multidiscipline associated with art education.

Keywords

Multidiscipline, Teaching Models, Art Education, Quality of Teaching.
Subscription Login to verify subscription
User
Notifications
Font Size

  • Al-Amri, M. (2005). An Evaluation of the Art Teacher Preparation Programme within Art Studio Courses at Sultan Qaboos University, Oman. Unpublished PhD Thesis. The University of Manchester.

  • Allison, B. (1982). Identifying the Core in Art and Design. Journal of Art and Design Education. 1 (1), pp.59-66.

  • Allison, B. & Hausman, J. (1998). The Limits of Theory in Art Education. Journal of Art & Design Education. 17 (2), pp.121-127.

  • Anderson, T. (2010). Art for Life: The Underpinnings. Journal of Art for Life. 1 (1), 3-6.

  • Barkan, M. (1962). Transition in Art Education: Changing conceptions of curriculum and theory. Art Education. 15 (7), p12-18.

  • Benzer, F. (2000). Three Art: Teachers' Understanding and Implementation of Discipline-Based Art Education. Unpublished EdD dissertation. Arizona State University.

  • Chapman, L. (1969). Curriculum Planning in Art Education. Ohio Art Education Association Newsletter.

  • Chapman, L. (1978). Approaches to Art in Education. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, Inc.

  • Day, M. (2000). Artist-Teacher: A Problematic Model for Art Education. In: Smith, R. (ed.) Reading in Discipline-Based Art Education: A Literature of Educational Reform. Reston, Virginia: The National Art Education Association (NAEA), pp.351-356.

  • Department of Education & Science. (1992). Art in the National Curriculum (England). HMSO.

  • Dobbs, M. (1998). Learning In and Through Art: a Guide to Discipline-Based Art Education. Los Angeles: The Getty Education Institute of the Arts.

  • Dunn, P. (1995). Creating Curriculum in Art. Reston, Virginia: The National Art Education Association (NAEA).

  • Efland, A. (1989). Curriculum Antecedents of Discipline-Based Art Education. In: Smith, R. (ed.) Discipline-Based Art Education: Origins, Meaning and Development. Chicago: University of Illinois Press. pp.57-94.

  • Eisner, E. (1972). Educating artistic vision. New York: Macmillan.

  • Eisner, E. (1998). Does Experience in the Arts Boost Academic Achievement? Art Education. 51 (1), pp.7-8.

  • Figg, G. (1989). Towards a Curriculum Model for Primary Art, Craft and Design. In: Dyson, A. (ed), Looking, Making and Learning: Art and Design in the Primary School. London: Institute of Education, the University of London Press, pp.33-55.

  • Figg, G. (1985). A Curriculum Model for Primary School. Journal of Art and Design Education. 4 (1).

  • Gilbert, A., Day, M. & Greer, W. (1989). Discipline-Based Art Education: Becoming Students of Art. In: Smith, R. (ed.) Discipline-Based Art Education: Origins, Meaning and Development. Chicago: University of Illinois Press. pp.129-193.

  • Greer, W. (1997). DBAE and Art Education Reform. Visual Arts Research. 23 (3), pp.25-33.

  • Hamblen, K. (1997). Second Generation DBAE. Visual Arts Research. 23 (2), pp.98- 106.

  • La Pierre, S. (1997) Introduction, in: La Pierre, S. & Zimmerman, E. (Eds.) Research Methods and Methodologies For Art Education. Reston: National Art Education Association. pp. xi-xvi.

  • Lindstrom, L. (1994). Art Education for Understanding: Goodman, Arts PROPEL, and DBAE. Journal of Art and Design Education. 13 (2), pp.189-201.

  • Lowenfeld, V. (1947). Creative and Mental Growth. New York: Macmillan.

  • MacGregor, R. (1985). An Outside View of Discipline-Based Art Education. Studies in Art Education. 26 (4), pp.241-246.

  • MacGregor, R. (1997). Editorial: The Evolution of Discipline-Based Art Education. Visual Arts Research. 23 (2), issue 46, pp.1-11.

  • Naidus, B. (2008). Arts for Change: Teaching Outside the Frame. California: New Village Press.

  • Read, H. (1943). Education Through Art. London: Faber & Faber.

  • Robinson, G. (1989). Stimulus for Art in the Primary School: an historical perspective. In: Dyson, A. (ed.) Looking, Making and Learning: Art & Design in the Primary School. London: Institute of Education, University of London, p11-32.

  • Sevigny, M. (1987). Discipline-based Art Education and Teacher Education. Journal of Aesthetic Education. 21 (2), pp.95-126.

  • Simmons, S. (2001). Multiple Intelligences at the Middle Level: Models for Learning in Art and across the Disciplines. Art Education. 54 (3), pp.18-23.

  • Smith, M. (2001). Curriculum-the Encyclopedia of Informal Education. [on-line] From: http://www.infed.org/encycopaedia.htm

  • Stahle-Fraser, J. (2010). The Culture Industry and Creative Economy: From an Individual Artist and Art Educator's Perspective. The International Journal of the Arts in Society, Volume 5, Number 3, 2010, http://www.arts-journal.com

  • The Arts in Schools Project team (1990). The Arts 5-16 Practice and Innovation. London: Oliver & Boyd.

  • Ulbricht, J. (2005). What is Community-Based Art Education? Art Education. March.

  • UNESCO (2006). Road Map for Arts Education, The World Conference on Arts Education: Building Creative Capacities for the 21st Century, Lisbon, 6-9 March 2006 [available online at]http://portal.unesco.org/culture/en/ev.php-URL_ID=39546&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html

  • UNESCO (2010). Seoul Agenda: Goals for the Development of Arts Education. A major outcome of

  • UNESCO's Second World Conference on Arts Education, Seoul: 25-28 May 2010. [available online at] http://portal.unesco.org/culture/en/files/41117/12798106085Seoul_Agenda_Goals_for_the_Development_of_Arts_Education.pdf/Seoul%2BAgenda_Goals%2Bfor%2Bthe%2BDevelopment%2Bof%2BArts%2BEducation.pdf

  • Wilson, B., Rubin, B. (1997). DBAE and Educational Change. Visual Arts Research. 23 (2), pp.89-97.


Abstract Views: 207

PDF Views: 0




  • Multidiscipline-Based Art Education Model: A Possible Way for Improving the Quality of Teaching Art

Abstract Views: 207  |  PDF Views: 0

Authors

Mohammed Al-Amri
Sultan Qaboos University, Oman

Abstract


It has been seen that teaching art education has taken different directions and multifaceted approaches. Many factors have played a direct or indirect role in shaping current trends in art education. It has an important role to play in the constructive transformation of educational systems that are struggling to meet the needs of learners in a rapidly changing world. However, this article argues that art education alone cannot resolve world challenges and problems. It assumes that good discipline of art education alone will never be good enough. It is enhanced by successful partnerships between related disciplines and strong relationships. As a result, art education today requires a comprehensive model to include all aspects of learners' development such as the creative, cognitive, emotional, aesthetic, social and other related aspects of children, young people and life-long learners. This theoretical article attempts to provide a general historical review of the best-known models in art education in chronological order and to suggest a model for improving the quality of teaching art which is based on multidiscipline associated with art education.

Keywords


Multidiscipline, Teaching Models, Art Education, Quality of Teaching.

References