Defining learning in arts education partnerships
———————————————————————————————————————————————
Connections: The Arts and Cognitive, Social and Personal Development
Dr. Rob Horowitz
Teachers College, Columbia University
Presented at the AERA National Conference
Montreal, April 2005
Assumptions of transfer are inherent to many arts partnerships. Arts learning is often thought to transfer to learning within other domains. Yet, the general education and psychological community has been consistently skeptical of the notion of transfer (Thorndike, 1901; Gagne, 1970) or has at the very least supported more complex and multi-dimensional views of transfer (Salomon & Perkins, 1989; Singley & Anderson, 1989). Many arts educators have embraced the notion of transfer of learning, while others have opposed it. This has led to debate, sometimes vociferous, about whether the arts should be taught for their own sake or for the transfer of extrinsic outcomes.
Recent studies have identified a number of connections between arts learning experiences and areas of student growth in academic disciplines, cognitive skills and social development (Fiske, 1999; Deasy, 2002). A recent review of multi-arts studies identified similar findings, by different researchers, describing effects of arts learning on general habits of mind, or thinking dispositions (Horowitz & Dempsey, 2002). However, other researchers have argued that claims about the effects of the arts on learning should be muted, as most studies are correlational or qualitative in design, and therefore limited in their ability to establish causal relationships between the arts and other areas of student development (Winner & Cooper, 2000).
Part of the difficulty in designing successful transfer studies in the arts may be an over dependence on traditional, linear notions of transfer and cognitive development. Contemporary cognitive theory suggests a dynamic interaction of learning within and across multiple domains of learning and thinking. Neuroscientists now describe a brain that is more labile and plastic than was thought before. Arts researchers might look to a different model of transfer, based upon a conception of multi-dimensional and interactive learning, within and across subjects and thinking domains. In one study, researchers developed a model of cognitive skills, social competencies, and personal dispositions - operational within the arts learning experience, and also applicable in other learning contexts - that might serve as the mechanism of transfer (Burton, Horowitz & Abeles, 2000).
A more practical limitation for designing arts transfer studies has been the lack of available valid and reliable instrumentation to measure the process of arts teaching and its potential impact on learning within the context of arts partnerships. This study sought to develop and test a set of instruments based upon the cognitive, social, personal models developed by Burton, Horowitz & Abeles.
Initial Lines of Inquiry
The purpose of this study was to: (1) identify and define areas of development - supported by arts learning - within cognitive, personal and social domains; (2) identify and define characteristics of the process of partnership and instruction that most likely influence cognitive, personal and social areas of development; and (3) investigate the relationship between the process of partnership and instruction and students' development.
The study took place over seven years in four New York City public elementary schools.1 Each school participated in long-term arts partnerships with ArtsConnection, a New York City arts-in-education organization. At first, ArtsConnection took the lead in partnership activities, providing facilitation and coordinating schedules. As the relationship matured, teachers and school staff became more equal partners in the collaboration.
Instruction was provided by teaching artists and classroom teachers. Artist residencies were typically 8 to 15 weeks long, with about an hour a week of direct contact with the artist. Instruction was provided in various arts disciplines and cultures over the initial four-year period, and curriculum links were established between the arts and academic subjects, particularly English and social studies. In the last three years of the study, arts instruction was focused on dance and drama and their connections to literacy instruction. Students ranged from kindergarten through fifth grade. The student body was exceptionally diverse, with students from a number of countries, representing many different languages.
The ArtsConnection and the schools held planning meetings, retreats, developed curriculum, and coordinated resources and scheduling. Artists and teachers co-planned the artists' curriculum in order to tailor it to the school's curriculum. ArtsConnection provided professional development for teachers and artists. Regularly scheduled "reflection meetings" were held between artists and teachers to discuss children's learning and instructional issues. At the end of each residency, children also participated in a reflection meeting to talk with the artist and teacher about what they had learned. These meetings were facilitated by ArtsConnection.
The first four years of research included three qualitative phases:2
-
1. Descriptive Study: Researchers in site observations wrote rich
descriptions of artist residencies' classes and planning and reflection
meetings. Teachers, artists, administrators, and children were interviewed
and surveyed.
2. Behavior Collection Study: During observations of artist residencies, researchers observed individual children according to protocols based upon the New York State Learning Standards in the Arts. We focused the observations on individual children and attempted to identify and document (1) what they did, (2) what they said, (3) what they produced, (4) or what they performed, that indicated learning to the observer.
3. Perceptions of Impact Study: In this phase, we gathered data on children's, teachers', and teaching artists' perceptions of impact. We developed sets of research questions organized into six lines of inquiry, based upon participants' perceptions of program impact on other participants. Data collection included classroom observations, and interviews/surveys of teachers, artists and children. (Kleiman, A, 2003)
-
We found qualitative evidence that the arts supported cognitive skills,
such as creativity, elaboration, originality, verbal expression, and the
ability to adapt multiple vantage points and perspectives. There were
notable gains in some social competencies, particularly the ability to
learn cooperatively in groups, and to develop different relationships
with peers and adults. The effect on personal learning dimensions were
particularly salient. These included perceived gains in positive risk-taking,
self-confidence, task persistence, and motivation. (Horowitz & Kleiman,
p. 8)
All VDP sessions and many other program components were recorded and transcribed. Two new NYC elementary schools were added to the research study. We conducted extensive ethnographic observation within the schools; observation of curriculum articulation meetings and child development workshops; observation of participating artists and teachers in the Video Description Process; and observation/participation with teacher planning sessions, professional development sessions and reflection meetings.
After the first year of the expanded study (2001-2002 school year) all data were again coded and analyzed with HyperResearch 2.0. We sought to confirm that data from the new schools (and within the new grant's programming) were consistent with the model developed in our prior research. The data from all schools were remarkably consistent in terms of potential effects on students, while dimensions of collaboration and partnership varied according to individual school (and classroom) contexts.
One goal of the new USDOE grant was for ArtsConnection to develop connections between arts and literacy. Therefore, we also examined the data to see if classrooms with the strongest arts programming and the most evidence of cognitive-personal-social development also showed evidence of potential gains in academic areas. We found many parallel competencies within the arts and English language arts (ELA) skills. The connections were most obvious between drama and ELA, particularly in verbal expression and listening skills. Children in drama/storytelling residencies also learned to interpret texts, and understand narrative, dramatic sequence, and character development. There were similar, but less apparent, development within the dance residencies, as children also learned to think kinesthetically and express and represent ideas and feelings through movement.
We also found that participating teachers acquired confidence and ability in using the arts in their classrooms. The teachers developed their ability to co-plan with artists and develop collaborative curricula.
Case Studies
During winter-spring 2003, researchers conducted case studies of individual artist residencies. Three exemplary collaborating teachers were selected within two of the schools. A researcher was assigned to each classroom to observe a complete artist residency (5th grade storytelling, 2nd grade puppetry, and 2nd grade dance). The overall objective of the case studies was to gather additional descriptive data on literacy development, cognitive-social-personal development, and the characteristics and behaviors of exemplary artist-teacher collaborations (Beaubrun, 2003; Falls, 2003; Fishman, 2003). Data collection in the case studies included observations, interviews and examination of student work.
The following set of questions was developed to guide fieldwork. Researchers were not expected to provide answers to the questions, but instead were to gather rich descriptions of behaviors in these areas for later analysis.
-
1. What conditions or characteristics in the artist-teacher partnerships
are most conducive to student learning?
2. What conditions or characteristics in the artist-teacher partnerships are most likely to lead to successful changes in classroom teacher practice?
3. Can children's development in cognitive, social and personal domains be better defined? What do children make, do, perform, say, or write that indicate growth in these areas?
4. Are there observable gains in students' literacy? What do children make, do, perform, say, or write that indicate growth in literacy? Is there a relationship between literacy development and the residencies' content or structure? If so, what kinds of literacy and how would literacy be defined?
5. If there are observable gains in student learning - either in cognitive, social and personal domains; or in literacy - how do these changes happen? What circumstances facilitated change? Was student growth more likely when artist and teachers made explicit connections between different areas of learning (such as arts and literacy)?
Selection of Variables and Development of Item Pool
Short extracts of data that described student development or the process of partnership and instruction were culled from the complete seven-year set of qualitative data. Data included: (1) descriptive field reports; (2) focused behavioral observations; (3) interviews with teachers, artists, children, principals, and ArtsConnection staff; (4) transcripts and observations of VDP sessions, curriculum articulation meetings, development workshops, reflection sessions, and planning meetings; (5) case study reports and supplemental data; and (6) ArtsConnection's action research data on effective collaborations, including interview transcripts. Most extracts were limited to 255 characters. The data were aggregated into a new, combined database and recoded to reflect the most salient variables.4 Each data extract was assigned one or two codes (identifying the variables). Examples of potential codes included: elaborative thinking, expression of ideas of feelings, focused perception, cooperative learning, self-confidence, motivation, and ownership of learning.
a total of 3,137 coded extracts were entered into the database. Potential rating scale items were developed from the extracts. As much as possible, the rating scale items used the exact language of the data, so that the items reflected the thoughts of teachers, artists, children, and field researchers. Sometimes the extract was paraphrased or adapted to create the scale items. Up to three rating scale items were developed for each of the 3,137 coded data extracts, yielding 3,333 scale items.
Several examples will help illustrate the item development process. In an observation report, a field researcher wrote, "[The artist] and the teachers have worked to integrate the residency content into the regular classroom curriculum, but this required communication and a willingness to negotiate on both sides." Two potential scale items were constructed from this extract to represent the variable collaboration between teachers and artists:
-
Artists and teachers had good communication and showed a willingness to
negotiate.
Artists and teachers worked together to integrate the residency content into the regular classroom curriculum.
-
I worked together with teachers to integrate the residency content into
the regular classroom curriculum.
-
Teachers and artists worked together to foster a supportive and warm environment.
collaboration between artists and teachers reflected negotiation, compromise and a real commitment for the long haul.
-
Children accomplished more than expected, because they were challenged.
In another interview, a teacher talked about observing connections between a dance residency and writing skills: "In those classes the connection between what [the artist] is doing and what they are drawing or what they are writing is really strong, so the parents are seeing that some more." We constructed this item reflecting the variable writing process:
-
The connection is really strong between what the children produced in
the arts and in their writing.
-
[The artist] explains that the story is not really yours until you
"understand it and...well you make if yours by putting your own details
and words in it-it's not really yours if you are memorizing the words-the
words should be your words, your perspective."
-
Students learned that their work was really theirs when they put in their
own details.
Construction and Administration of Rating Scales
Items were selected from the database to represent these variables: collaboration between teachers and artists, elaboration, expression of ideas or feelings, cooperative learning, new or better relationships with students, self-confidence, motivation, ownership of learning, the writing process, teacher buy-in, teachers' comfort/knowledge with the arts, teachers seeing students in a new light, school leadership, and school climate. The items were paired with a five-point Likert-type scale (with a range from "strongly disagree" to "strongly agree").
The rating scales were administered to teachers in three of the partnership schools. Every teacher in each school responded to the rating scales unless they were absent the day of administration (N=53). Frequencies, means and standard deviations were obtained for each item.
Initial Results from Rating Scales
Overall, teachers responded very favorably, indicating strong teacher support for the program. The results also provide additional evidence that the program supports positive changes in teacher practice and student development. (In the following tables, 5=Strongly Agree; 4=Somewhat Agree; 3=Not Sure; 2=Somewhat Disagree; and 1=Strongly Disagree.)
Teachers responded very positively to items about collaboration. They reported that they "had good communication" with artists and "worked together to foster a supportive and warm environment." The concept of "negotiation, compromise and a real commitment for the long haul" exemplifies an ideal collaboration.
| Scale Item | 5 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1 | Mean | SD |
| Artist and teachers had good communication and showed a willingness to negotiate. | 75.4% | 24.6% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 4.75 | .434 |
| Teachers and artists worked together to foster a supportive and warm environment. | 75.0% | 23.2% | 1.8% | 0% | 0% | 4.73 | .486 |
| Collaboration between artists and teachers reflected negotiation, compromise and a real commitment for the long haul. | 66.7% | 28.1% | 5.3% | 0% | 0% | 4.61 | .590 |
| I had regular and meaningful communication with the resident artists. | 60.7% | 32.1% | 1.8% | 5.4% | 0% | 4.48 | .786 |
| I really enjoyed building a collaborative partnership with the artist. | 64.9% | 29.8% | 3.5% | 1.8% | 0% | 4.58 | .653 |
One component of creative thinking is elaboration, the ability to work in detail, going beyond minimal expectations. Teachers were most likely to respond that children felt their work "was really theirs when they put in their own details."
| Scale Item | 5 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1 | Mean | SD |
| Students came up with amazing details in their work. | 31.6% | 47.4% | 17.5% | 3.5% | 0% | 4.07 | .799 |
| Students focused on making sure that they included interesting and clear details to their work. | 16.1% | 58.9% | 19.6% | 5.4% | 0% | 3.86 | .749 |
| Students learned that their work was really theirs when they put in their own details. | 44.6% | 39.3% | 16.1% | 0% | 0% | 4.29 | .731 |
| Students added sensory details to their work. | 26.8% | 41.1% | 26.8% | 5.4% | 0% | 3.89 | .867 |
In interviews, many teachers reported gains in verbal and written expressive abilities. Teachers responded very favorably to items about expressive abilities, agreeing that "students' level of expression increased" and they "expressed themselves creatively and independently."
| Scale Item | 5 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1 | Mean | SD |
| Students learned to add expressive qualities to their work. | 50.9% | 40.4% | 5.3% | 3.5% | 0% | 4.39 | .750 |
| Students' level of expression increased as the residency progressed. | 52.6% | 43.9% | 3.5% | 0% | 0% | 4.49 | .571 |
| Children expressed themselves creatively and independently. | 51.8% | 42.9% | 3.6% | 1.8% | 0% | 4.45 | .658 |
| Students learned to express what they felt. | 38.6% | 54.4% | 5.3% | 1.8% | 0% | 4.30 | .654 |
Throughout the study, we observed children learning to work together effectively on long-tern arts projects. Teachers responded very favorably to items about cooperative learning, agreeing that children understood that "everyone could contribute" to the group and that "they could work together on arts projects despite their differences."
| Scale Item | 5 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1 | Mean | SD |
| Children in group work understood that they were not out there all alone, and that everyone could contribute. | 66.7% | 24.6% | 7.0% | 1.8% | 0% | 4.56 | .708 |
| Students working in groups demonstrated good coordination, allowing each other turns to speak and try out each other's ideas. | 38.6% | 52.6% | 7.0% | 1.8% | 0% | 4.28 | .675 |
| The children realized they could work together on group arts projects despite their differences. | 49.1% | 36.8% | 14.0% | 0% | 0% | 4.35 | .719 |
| In groups, students could put aside their differences to reach a common goal. | 32.1% | 44.6% | 19.6% | 3.6% | 0% | 4.05 | .818 |
Teachers reported that the arts projects helped students develop better relationships and "open up" to other students. There were no negative responses to this item.
| Scale Item | 5 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1 | Mean | SD |
| Isolated students opened up to other students through their arts experiences. | 42.1% | 36.8% | 21.1% | 0% | 0% | 4.21 | .773 |
Teachers reported gains in self-confidence through the residencies. There were no negative responses to this item.
| Scale Item | 5 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1 | Mean | SD |
| Students' confidence developed as the residencies progressed. | 63.2% | 29.8% | 7.0% | 0% | 0% | 4.56 | .627 |
According to our analysis of qualitative data, the residencies engaged students and increased their motivation to participate. They developed a capacity for sustained effort on challenging tasks. A majority of teachers agreed that "difficult students tried harder" in the residencies when responding to a rating scale on motivation.
| Scale Item | 5 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1 | Mean | SD |
| Children accomplished more than expected, because they were challenged. | 33.3% | 52.6% | 12.3% | 1.8% | 0% | 4.18 | .710 |
| Otherwise difficult students tried harder in the arts classes. | 35.1% | 40.4% | 15.8% | 7.0% | 1.8% | 4.00 | .982 |
Teachers responded favorably to items on students' ownership of their learning process. Teachers agreed that their artwork "belonged to them" and "reflected their personal experience."
| Scale Item | 5 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1 | Mean | SD |
| Students' artwork reflected their personal experience. | 52.6% | 29.8% | 15.8% | 1.8% | 0% | 4.33 | .809 |
| Students felt that they decided what was in their artwork. | 38.6% | 43.9% | 12.3% | 3.5% | 1.8% | 4.14 | .895 |
| Students felt that their work belonged to them, not to the teacher or the artist. | 54.4% | 33.3% | 10.5% | 1.8% | 0% | 4.40 | .753 |
76% of teachers "strongly" or "somewhat" agreed that there was a strong connection between what "children produced in the arts and in their writing" and 66% of teachers agreed that "students incorporated vocabulary and expression from arts classes in their writing."
| Scale Item | 5 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1 | Mean | SD |
| The connection is really strong between what the children produced in the arts and in their writing. | 26.3% | 50.9% | 19.3% | 3.5% | 0% | 4.00 | .779 |
| Students incorporated vocabulary and expression from arts classes in their writing. | 30.4% | 35.7% | 30.4% | 3.6% | 0% | 3.93 | .871 |
| Students had many opportunities to write about their arts experiences, which helped their literacy. | 27.8% | 42.6% | 16.7% | 13.0% | 0% | 3.85 | .979 |
| Students with ELA difficulties now take more risks in their use of language due to the residencies. | 27.8% | 40.7% | 29.6% | 1.9% | 0% | 3.94 | .811 |
We also developed and administered rating scales measuring teachers' attitudes towards their own development and participation. Through responding to a rating scale of teacher "buy-in" to the arts residencies, teachers indicated strong support for the goals and practice of the program. They valued the arts experiences and "embraced the residencies," preparing their classes for the artist visits.
| Scale Item | 5 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1 | Mean | SD |
| I value the arts experience as addressing another part of the child that tests do not. | 78.9% | 17.5% | 3.5% | 0% | 0% | 4.75 | .510 |
| Teachers embraced the residencies and prepared the class before artists arrived. | 59.6% | 33.3% | 3.5% | 1.8% | 1.8% | 4.47 | .804 |
Teachers are more likely to successfully collaborate with an artist if they are comfortable and confident with using the arts in the classroom. Teachers reported that they gained an understanding of "what it means to teach in an art form" and that the residencies helped "expand the way I teach." While positive, responses were more likely in the "somewhat agree" category.
| Scale Item | 5 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1 | Mean | SD |
| The arts residencies have totally changed the way I teach. | 10.5% | 40.5% | 31.6% | 12.3% | 5.3% | 3.39 | 1.013 |
| Reflecting with children had an impact on my instruction. | 33.9% | 42.9% | 17.9% | 3.6% | 1.8% | 4.04 | .914 |
| I use arts more in my lessons as a result of the residencies. | 24.6% | 47.4% | 19.3% | 7.0% | 1.8% | 3.86 | .934 |
| I have a better understanding of what it means to teach in an art form because of the residencies. | 37.5% | 48.2% | 8.9% | 3.6% | 1.8% | 4.16 | .869 |
| The arts residencies helped me expand the way I teach. | 28.1% | 50.9% | 15.8% | 1.8% | 3.5% | 3.98 | .916 |
In interviews, teachers often reported that the arts residencies helped them learn more about the potential of their students. In responding to rating scales, teachers agreed that "children who struggle with their reading and writing can succeed in other ways" and that they noticed "different abilities" through the residencies.
| Scale Item | 5 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1 | Mean | SD |
| I see my students differently as a result of the arts residencies. | 25.0% | 42.9% | 25.0% | 5.4% | 1.8% | 3.84 | .930 |
| Through the residencies, I noticed that children who struggle with their reading and writing can succeed in other ways. | 62.5% | 30.4% | 7.1% | 0% | 0% | 4.55 | .630 |
| I observed different abilities in students because of the residencies. | 63.2% | 31.6% | 3.5% | 1.8% | 0% | 4.56 | .655 |
Teachers responded positively to items on school leadership, noting that their principals were "very informed and committed to the program" and "personally involved" in making sure it "fit the needs of the school.".
| Scale Item | 5 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1 | Mean | SD |
| Principal was personally involved in selection of residencies so they fit the needs of the school. | 47.6% | 21.4% | 26.2% | 2.4% | 2.4% | 4.10 | 1.031 |
| Principal made a conscious decision to choose specific art forms for the residencies to match the needs of the students. | 45.2% | 26.2% | 23.8% | 2.4% | 2.4% | 4.10 | 1.008 |
| Principal is very informed and committed to the program. | 64.3% | 28.6% | 2.4% | 4.8% | 0% | 4.52 | .773 |
Teachers reported that the program improved school climate, agreeing that "the whole atmosphere at our school has changed" because of the arts. There were no negative responses to this item.
| Scale Item | 5 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 1 | Mean | SD |
| The whole atmosphere has changed at our school because of the presence of the arts. | 47.6% | 40.5% | 11.9% | 0% | 0% | 4.36 | .692 |
Relationship among Variables
Means were obtained for each rating scale. When assessing student development, teachers were most likely to attribute gains in self-confidence and expression to the residencies. They were least likely to report gains in elaboration and the writing process. (Mean scores can range from 1 to 5 with a score of '1' indicating 'strongly disagree' and a score of '5' indicating 'strongly agree', the highest rating.)
| Writing Process | Ownership | Motivation | Cooperative Learning | Expression | Elaboration | Student Relations | Self Confidence |
| 3.92 | 4.29 | 4.09 | 4.26 | 4.41 | 4.02 | 4.21 | 4.56 |
Teachers responded most favorably to items about collaboration with artists. They were less likely to report gains in comfort with the arts.
| Collaboration | School Climate | Comfort and Knowledge with Arts | Seeing Students in New Light | Leadership |
| 4.63 | 4.39 | 3.86 | 4.29 | 4.24 |
We examined relationships among the rated variables. There were many significant correlations among variables on implementation and variables on student outcomes
We obtained Pearsons i correlation estimates for the variables measured by the rating scales. The variable collaboration between teachers and artists was significantly associated with students' elaboration (r=.42, p=<.01), expression (r=.49, p=<.01), cooperative learning (r=.54, p=<.01), motivation (r=.72, p=<.01), ownership of learning (r=.47, p=<.01), and the writing process (r=.70, p=<.01). Those teachers that reported the greatest gains in their own comfort with using the arts in their classroom were more likely to report student improvement in these areas.
Residency Experience and Rating Scale Results
Teachers were asked to indicate the total number of ArtsConnection artist residencies they had participated in. The teachers reported participating in 1 to 14 residencies, with a mean of 5.87.
We compared the upper quartile of most experienced teachers with the quartile that had the least experience with artist residencies. Teachers with the most experience had higher mean scores in ratings of collaboration with artists, comfort/knowledge with the arts, seeing students in a new light, and school leadership. Differences between groups were greatest in the area of comfort with the arts.
Process Variables Compared with Number of Residencies
Teachers with the most experience with artist residencies also rated their students higher in expression, elaboration, imagination5, and the writing process. The biggest differences between groups were in the ares of elaboration and the writing process.
Cognitive and Writing Variables Compared with Number of Residencies
The most experienced teachers rated their students more highly in social dimensions of cooperative learning and improved student relationships. The biggest differences were in the area of better relationships with other students.
Social Variables Compared with Number of Residencies
The most experienced teachers rated their students more highly in areas of personal development: risk taking6, ownership of learning, motivation and self-confidence.
Personal Variables Compared with Number of Residencies
We also identified high and low quartiles of teachers reporting gains in comfort with the arts. Those teachers reporting the greatest gains in comfort with the arts also reported the most gains in students' expression, imagination, writing process, and elaboration. The greatest differences were in elaborative thinking and writing.
Comfort with Arts Compared with Cognitive Variables
The quartile with the most comfort with using the arts also rated their students higher in measures of risk-taking, ownership, motivation, and self-confidence.
Comfort with Arts Compared with Personal Variables
Conclusion and Implications
The results from the rating scales are consistent with our qualitative findings. In classrooms with the most effective instruction and collaboration by artists and teachers, students were more likely to demonstrate cognitive skills, such as elaborative thinking, verbal and non-verbal expressive abilities within different contexts, focused perception, and reapplication of learning within new contexts. Children that participated in the most effective artist-teacher collaborations were more likely to demonstrate improvement in social skills in areas of cooperative learning and improved relationships with teachers and peers. In these same classrooms, students demonstrated changes in self-perception and personal growth in areas of positive risk-taking, self-confidence, motivation, and a sense of ownership of the learning process. Within certain instructional contexts, students were able to apply some of these skills, such as elaborative thinking, in their development of verbal and written expressive abilities.
These areas of student development were significantly associated with areas of teacher growth and change, such as the application of new skills in the classroom, increased ability to integrate the arts, greater comfort with using the arts, buy-in and commitment to the program, and changes in perceptions of their student's abilities.
These results were consistent with our analysis of qualitative data. Over the course of the study, we observed teachers becoming far more adept and confident at integrating the arts. They also became more sophisticated at working with visiting artists, articulating their needs and coordinating their curriculum with the artists and other teachers. The residencies also provided teachers with the opportunity to see aspects of their children that would otherwise not be apparent. Through the arts projects they gained a different perspective on some of their students' abilities, achievement, character, and personality. In interviews, we often heard compelling stories from teachers about the new perspectives they gained on some of their individual students. This sometimes led to increased expectations for achievement in other subject areas, as well, altering some children's trajectory through the elementary school experience. These are significant areas of teacher growth that were only made possible through sustained funding and organizational support by the schools and ArtsConnection.
The set of instruments developed through this study can be used by other researchers to test these findings, investigate student learning, and evaluate arts programs and partnerships. Perhaps more significantly, their development has contributed to our understanding of the general thinking dispositions, or habits of mind, that are stimulated by learning in the arts, laying the groundwork for continued study.
The areas of cognitive, social and personal growth explored in this study present a valuable alternative for research on the potential extrinsic effects of arts learning. These areas of student development are inherent to the arts but also operational in other educational and lifelong contexts. Continued investigation can help unravel these relationships and contribute to our understanding of learning within and across subject and thinking domains.
Recently, there has been an increasing over-emphasis on using standardized test scores in academic subjects to evaluate all aspects of education, including arts teaching and learning. This has led to a narrowing of the curriculum to testable skills in core subjects and a de-emphasis on arts instruction. Evaluators of arts partnerships have increasingly been required to provide evidence of program effectiveness through experimental research designs and outcome-based evaluations, using standardized tests as the principal outcome measure. However, these approaches can oversimplify a complex teaching and learning environment, and can lead to simplistic and unjustified conclusions. Mixed-method approaches offer more promise for understanding the potential effects of arts partnerships. Assessment instruments based upon observations and perceptions of program participants have more validity than measures drawn from other subject disciplines that are only distantly related to the instructional content of arts programming.
1Principal Research Associates included Elizabeth Beaubrun, Susan Falls, Maggie Fishman, Amy Kleiman and Dan Serig. (return to study)
2More detail on the methods and results of these research phases can be found in Horowitz, R. & Kleiman, A. The relationship between arts learning and cognitive skills, social competencies and personal dispositions. Paper presented at the AERA conference in New Orleans (April 2002). (return to study)
3VDP participants included teachers, administrators, artists and ArtsConnection staff. (return to study)
4The final variable outline used for coding is in the Appendix. (return to study)
5Teachers also responded to a rating scale measuring their perceptions of children's imagination adapted from the Teacher Perception Scale (TPS). The scale was developed as part of the Learning In and Through the Arts study. (return to study)
6The risk-taking scale is derived from the TPS. (return to study)
References
-Beaubrun, E. (2003). P.S. 39 case study (draft). Unpublished report.
-Burton, J., Horowitz, R., & Abeles, H. (2000). Learning in and through the arts: The question of transfer. Studies in Art Education, 41(3), 228-257.
-Deasy, R.J., (Ed.). (2002). Critical links: Learning in the arts and student academic and social development. Washington, D.C.: Arts Education Partnership.
-Falls, S. (2003). Fifth grade case study at P.S. 130 (draft).
-Fishman, M. (2003). ArtsConnection at P.S. 130 case study (draft). Unpublished report.
-Fiske, E. B. (Ed.), Champions of Change: The impact of arts on learning. Washington, D.C.: The Arts Education Partnership and The President's Committee on the Arts and the Humanities.
-Gagne, R. M. (1970). The conditions of learning. New York: Holt.
-Horowitz, R. & Webb-Dempsey, J. (2002). Promising signs of positive effects: Lessons from the multi-arts studies. In R. J. Deasy (Ed.). Critical links: Learning in the arts and student academic and social development. (pp. 98-100). Washington, D.C.: Arts Education Partnership.
-Horowitz, R. & Kleiman, A. The relationship between arts learning and cognitive skills, social competencies and personal dispositions. Paper presented at the AERA conference, New Orleans, LA. (April 2002).
-Kleiman, A. (2003). Teachers', teaching artists' and students' perceptions of the acquisition of new teaching skills and student learning within an elementary school arts partnership. Unpublished Masters Thesis, Columbia University.
-Salomon, G. & Perkins, D.N. (1989). Rocky roads to transfer: Rethinking mechanisms of a neglected phenomenon. Educational Psychologist, 24(2), 113-142.
-Singley, M. K. & Anderson, J. R. (1989). The transfer of cognitive skill, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
-Thorndike, E. L. & Woodworth, R. S. (1901). The influence of improvement in our mental functions upon the eficiency of another function. Psychological Review, 9, 374-382.
-Winner, E. & Cooper, M. (2000). Mute those claims: No evidence (yet) for a causal link between arts study and academic achievement. The Journal of Aesthetic Education. 34(3-4), 11-75.
Appendix - Variable Coding Outline
| 1. Implementation and partnership issues | |||
| 1.1. Collaboration | |||
| 1.1.1. Collaboration between school and ArtsConnection | |||
| 1.1.2. Collaboration between teachers and artists | |||
| 1.2. Planning and Reflection | |||
| 1.3. Scheduling | |||
| 1.4. Instruction | |||
| 1.4.1. Lesson structure | |||
| 1.4.2. Artist curriculum | |||
| 1.4.3. Teacher curriculum | |||
| 1.4.4. Alignment of teacher and artist curriculum | |||
| 1.4.5. School curriculum | |||
| 1.5. Sustainability | |||
| 1.6. Obstacles | |||
| 2. Student learning | |||
| 2.1. Cognitive competencies | |||
| 2.1.1. Creativity | |||
| 2.1.1.1. Elaboration (adding detail beyond minimal expectations) | |||
| 2.1.1.2. Originality (novel or original ideas) | |||
| 2.1.1.3. Imagine new possibilities | |||
| 2.1.2. Expression of ideas or feelings | |||
| 2.1.3. Focused perception | |||
| 2.1.4. Taking multiple or alternative vantage points | |||
| 2.1.5. Construction and organization of meaning | |||
| 2.1.6. Making connections (across disciplines, domains of learning, or ideas) | |||
| 2.1.7. Reapplication of learning in new contexts or different disciplines | |||
| 2.1.8. Learning through kinesthetic domain | |||
| 2.2. Social development | |||
| 2.2.1. Cooperative learning | |||
| 2.2.2. Compassion and empathy | |||
| 2.2.3. Displaying learning before the community | |||
| 2.2.4. New or better relationships with students | |||
| 2.2.5. New or better relationships with teachers | |||
| 2.3. Personal dispositions or self-perceptions | |||
| 2.3.1. Risk taking | |||
| 2.3.2. Self-confidence | |||
| 2.3.3. Motivation | |||
| 2.3.4. Task persistence | |||
| 2.3.5. Developing values or personal choices | |||
| 2.3.6. Ownership of learning | |||
| 2.4. Arts learning | |||
| 2.4.1. Dance | |||
| 2.4.2. Drama | |||
| 2.4.3. Music | |||
| 2.4.4. Visual arts | |||
| 2.5. Academic learning | |||
| 2.5.1. English language arts | |||
| 2.5.1.1. Writing process | |||
| 2.5.1.2. Verbal expression | |||
| 2.5.2. Social studies | |||
| 2.5.2.1. Cultural understanding | |||
| 3. Teacher change and participation | |||
| 3.1. New skills in the classroom | |||
| 3.2. New use of resources | |||
| 3.3. Changes to curriculum | |||
| 3.4. Teacher buy-in | |||
| 3.5. Changes in integrating arts | |||
| 3.6. Comfort level/knowledge with performing, teaching, teaching, or discussing the arts | |||
| 3.7. Ability to perceive children's development in the arts | |||
| 3.8. Seeing students in a new light or from a different perspective | |||
| 4. School change | |||
| 4.1. Leadership | |||
| 4.2. Parent involvement | |||
| 4.3. School climate | |||
| 4.4. Arts displays, performances, celebrations, etc. | |||
| 5. ArtsConnection change | |||
| 5.1. Building capacity | |||
| 5.2. Reflection process | |||
| 5.3. Artist professional development | |||
| 5.4. Relationship with funders and funder initiatives | |||
| 5.5. Relationship to other, or competing, initiatives or arts organizations | |||
Return to the main symposium page here