Structure of choice
Structure of choice
Embedded Files
Choice Continuum
Choice Continuum
There's a wealth of different ways to design your choice-focused curriculum, but first and foremost it's important to remember that choice is a continuum with very minimal choices on one end and complete freedom on the other (Douglas & Jaquith, 2009; Hetland et al. 20013; Purtee & Sands, 2018, 2021). In figure 2, I've given a range of choice methods used by art educators across the pedagogical spectrum and placed them in order from least to most student choice.
Choice advocates may refer to minimal choice negatively, because these types of choices are relatively shallow in terms of the student expressing themselves. However, students must be taught to make choices and constraints are important to that process (Castro 2007; Denton 2005; Purtee & Sands 2018; Thomas & Brown, 2011). When students are not accustomed to making choices, and they're thrown into an environment of total freedom, they often struggle to make decisions (Brei 2011a; Purtee & Sands 2018). Therefore, smaller choices act as a gateway to dislodging firmly held teacher-directed learning expectations of students (Purtee & Sands, 2021).
Regardless of where you and your students start on this continuum, the goal of a choice-focused curriculum is to create a framework for experiences that, over time, develop the skills necessary for self-directed learning. Whether your goal is to make artists as Purtee and Sands (2021) describe their methodology, or to create lifelong learners as others have advocated (Thomas & Brown, 2011; Falk & Dierking, 2002), teaching students how to direct their own learning is a skill that serves them not only in the classroom but in society and their life beyond the art room (Dewey, 1990; Hetland et al., 2013) and by creating spaces for students to learn these skills, we, as art educators, are creating spaces for possibilities.
Figure 2: Copyright 2021 Brooke Brei - All rights reserved
"That is, we do not see education in linear-causal terms of achieving preset objectives or re-presentation of established truths, but as a participation in the ever-unfolding project of becoming capable of new, perhaps as-yet unimaginable possibilities"
(Davis et al., 2008, pp.20-21).
Symbiosis
Symbiosis
Choice and structure are symbiotic. You must have both to create a successful choice-focused curriculum (Thomas & Brown, 2011). Choice without structure is unproductive (Taylor, 2021a; Dewey, 1990), and structure without choice is stifling (Deci & Ryan, 2000, 2008; Davis et al., 2008; Purtee & Sands, 2018). When students are given too much choice without the appropriate level of experience with learning and working independently, they are unable to perform (Taylor, 2021a; Thomas & Brown, 2011). Many will be paralyzed by choice as Hansen (2013) describes his own experience. Others will run around in various directions hoping they're doing it right.
Figure 4: Inspired in part by Deci & Ryan (2000, 2008). Copyright 2021 Brooke Brei - All rights reserved
Figure 4 demonstrates how motivation and the choice spectrum can be compared. The blue cable is the choice continuum while the green illustrates the spectrum of motivations described by Deci and Ryan (2000, 2008).
A student affected by external motivation performs for a carrot or to avoid the stick. Each task a student completes requires some form of reward or threat of punishment.
Introjected motivation is indicated by a student who has internalized the carrot or the stick. For example, a student who is known for getting good grades, will perform to continue to receive that recognition.
Identified motivation is manifested by the student's understanding of the constraints. They still feel somewhat controlled, but they understand why the control is placed on them.
When a student exhibits integrated motivation, the extrinsic factors are fully accepted because they are in line with the student's needs, wants, and identity. The student's understanding of how particular constraints are of benefit to them transforms extrinsic motivations into intrinsic ones.
Intrinsic motivations come from the student. They perform because they desire some result of their performance that isn't connected to any extrinsic factors.
The motivational types are not a guarantee when using a particular example on the choice continuum. Each student is different, so you will have a mix of motivational types regardless of what level of choice you're using. However, you can see how the motivational types are likely to correlate with the examples on the choice continuum. You may continue to have extrinsically motivated students who have to be constantly threatened with being ineligible for athletics due to incomplete work, even when tasked with student-directed assignments. However, it is likely that the majority of the class will see the constraints of these types of experiences as valuable and begin to internalize them. Similarly, if you provide only minimal choice for longer than necessary for students to gain comfort with that level, it is unlikely that you will see motivations rise above introjection.
choice in practice
choice in practice
Choice-based
Choice-based
Studio thinking
Studio thinking
Goals
Goals
resources
resources
Through the application of media centers and mini-lessons, students spend the majority of their class time engaging in play, experimentation, and artworks of their choice.
Studio Thinking investigates students in studio art classrooms and outlines 7 dispositions or studio habits of mind.
Goals focus student's desires into a form that directs their learning.
Many advocates of choice don't present a framework for it's application in the classroom, but provide support through research and experience.
Application to the Plug and play curriculum
Application to the Plug and play curriculum
There are four types of units in Plug and Play. Each type varies in the amount and quality of choice, but each has a part to play in teaching skills for student-directed learning and art standards.
There are four types of units in Plug and Play. Each type varies in the amount and quality of choice, but each has a part to play in teaching skills for student-directed learning and art standards.
content
content
These lessons and units have very little, if any choice, but always ask the student to perform a task that allows them to practice an independent learning skill or apply the learning to their own experience.
The content contained in these lessons is needed by every student in order to meet standards or build knowledge and/or experience for student-directed learning.
passion project
passion project
These units come at the end of grading periods. They are an opportunity for you as an amazing art teacher to share some of your passion projects with your students. These are projects you love because the students love them.
They are not required and should include minimal assessment because they are designed as an extension for students who are on track with their work while also allowing those that need more time to complete the mandatory work to catch up.
Skill goals
Skill goals
These first goals introduce students to the process that will ultimately become fully student-directed.
To begin, students choose an art skill from a list and work through a prescribed artistic process. After writing a goal based on the skill they chose, they then research and practice before using their newly developed skill to create an artwork. Each day, they reflect on their work in their digital journal with a photo and at least 3 sentences. When they're done, they reflect on the process as a whole.
expression goals
expression goals
After practicing the goal process and participating in some content units on expression and copyright, the goal process shifts from one focused on skills and practice to expression and planning.
The goal process continues to require students to reflect on their work each day in their digital journal, but they are now responsible deciding when and how much they need to practice and research. For these goals, critique is also added to the process.
discussion
discussion
You may view comments on the various sections of the site here. To participate in the discussion, please join the Plug and Play Group. You can set the frequency of notifications by changing your subscription setting, so you won't receive any messages you don't want.
You may view comments on the various sections of the site here. To participate in the discussion, please join the Plug and Play Group. You can set the frequency of notifications by changing your subscription setting, so you won't receive any messages you don't want.
references
references
Brei, B. (2011a). I can make whatever i want? My journey into choice-based art education. Texas Trends in Art Education, 2011. 23-28. https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth279695/m1/29/
Castro, J. C. (2007). Constraints that enable: Creating spaces for artistic inquiry. Proceedings from the 2007 Complexity Science and Educational Research Conference, 75-86.
Davis, B., Sumara, D. J., & Luce-Kapler, R. (2008). Engaging minds: Changing teaching in complex times. United Kingdom: Routledge. (Original work published 2000).
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The "what" and "why" of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11(4), 227-268. http://www.jstor.org/stable/1449618
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2008). Facilitating optimal motivation and psychological well-being across life's domains. Canadian Psychology, 49(1), 14-34. https://libproxy.library.unt.edu/login?url=https://www-proquest-com.libproxy.library.unt.edu/scholarly-journals/facilitating-optimal-motivation-psychological/docview/220818810/se-2?accountid=7113
Denton, P. (2005). Learning through academic choice. United States: Northeast Foundation for Children.
Dewey, J. (1990). The school and society and the child and the curriculum. United States: University of Chicago Press. (Original work published in 1900,1902).
Douglas, K. M., & Jaquith, D. B. (2009). Engaging learners through artmaking: Choice-based art education in the classroom. United States: Teachers College Press.
Falk, J. H., & Dierking, L. D. (2002). Lessons without limit: How free-choice learning is transforming education. United Kingdom: AltaMira Press.
Hansen, P. (2013, May 21). Embrace the shake. [Video]. TED. https://www.ted.com/talks/phil_hansen_embrace_the_shake.
Hetland, L., Winner, E., Veenema, S., & Sheridan, K. M. (2013). Studio thinking 2: The real benefits of visual arts education, second edition. United States: Teachers College Press.
Purtee, M., & Sands, I. (2018). The open art room. United States: Davis Publications, Incorporated.
Purtee, M., & Sands, I. (2021). Making artists. United States: Davis Publications, Incorporated.
Taylor, J. (2021a, February 5). 4 innovative ways to create with constraints. The Art of Education University. https://theartofeducation.edu/2021/02/05/4-innovative-ways-to-create-with-constraints/
Thomas, D., & Brown, J. S. (2011). A new culture of learning: Cultivating the imagination for a world of constant change. United Kingdom: CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform.
Page updated
Google Sites
Report abuse