FINE ARTS PROGRAM IN SCHOOLS

Fine Arts Program in schools

Fine Arts Program in schools

The objectives of the curriculum of schools of art have changed dramatically over the past century in the United States. Initially, the art was part of a goal of schooling that much of what is now called visual arts education prepared children for life in the labor force, and took the form of teaching drawing and drawing accuracy, providing individual discipline and technical skills useful in commercial areas or as a support industrial growth. In the early 20 th century, especially with the rise of progressive education and a growing interest in a child-centered curriculum in art came to be appreciated for its value in assisting in the development of the capacities of children and an interest in "creative self-expression" promoted by Viktor Lowenfeld helped support the inclusion of the arts in the school curriculum. In this approach to art curriculum, emphasized artistic creation in traditional art media, evaluation of results was limited, and little is required of teachers to incorporate history or philosophy of art systematically. The curriculum for the lost art in public school reforms that followed the Soviet launch of Sputnik in 1957, when more emphasis was given to "hard subjects" of mathematics, science and reading, and the contributions of art to the national good seemed less clear that their individual contribution to growth had been. However, art educators committed to maintaining the art schools, and from the 1960's statewide efforts throughout the country achieved the creation of arts councils in the state, promoting and supporting the arts, both in the school curriculum and in local communities. One of the strongest arguments for arts education has, for several decades has been that at its best teaches children to express their ideas and culture in creative ways that might not have been fully anticipated. The 1980's saw the introduction of the concept of "multiple intelligences" through the work of Howard Gardner at Project Zero at Harvard University, to give new impetus to the argument that art forms to respond to the world are valid and worthy of attention in school.

The 1983 publication of A Nation at Risk again focused attention on the importance of education in mathematics, science, reading, and being able to assess student progress and compare the success of U.S. schools with other countries. Evaluation increasingly important every time the national attention is directed to measuring school effectiveness is a challenge to an evaluation of the art curriculum consistent and reliable. Many educators have criticized especially the 2002 No Child Left Behind and its emphasis on measurement and this can cause damage to the objectives and practices of art education: Evaluation of the curriculum of art is always more complex than in disciplines where the results unpredictable and surprise are less valued. However, most art educators agree that clear rules in art education are essential both to ensure the quality of teaching and keep up the art from other disciplines: quality standards, ...