Research Objectives in the past
In the past teachers viewed assessment as subordinate to the children's creative experiences. But students do learn while creating and that learning can be measured.
Historical Overview of Assessment of Art
Until relatively recently the principal emphasis within the field of art education was on creative development with little regard to any substantial measurement of the learning that accompanied that development.
Test administration involves the administrator requesting children to complete three individual drawings on separate pieces of paper. Children are asked to draw a man, a woman, and themselves. No further instructions are given and the child is free to make the drawing in whichever way he/she would like. There is no right or wrong type of drawing, although the child must make a drawing of a whole person each time — i.e. head to feet, not just the face. The test has no time limit; however, children rarely take longer than about 10 or 15 minutes to complete all three drawings. Harris's book (1963) provides scoring scales which are used to examine and score the child's drawings. The test is completely non-invasive and non-threatening to children, which is part of its appeal.
Historical Overview of Assessment of Art
Until relatively recently the principal emphasis within the field of art education was on creative development with little regard to any substantial measurement of the learning that accompanied that development.
- As early as 1926 the Psychologist Florence Goodenough developed the Draw a man Test in an effort to measure intelligence through drawing
Test administration involves the administrator requesting children to complete three individual drawings on separate pieces of paper. Children are asked to draw a man, a woman, and themselves. No further instructions are given and the child is free to make the drawing in whichever way he/she would like. There is no right or wrong type of drawing, although the child must make a drawing of a whole person each time — i.e. head to feet, not just the face. The test has no time limit; however, children rarely take longer than about 10 or 15 minutes to complete all three drawings. Harris's book (1963) provides scoring scales which are used to examine and score the child's drawings. The test is completely non-invasive and non-threatening to children, which is part of its appeal.
- In 1929 The McAdory Art test (test artistic ability)
The McAdory art test was an attempt to use pictures which could be comprehended without peculiar cultural background. As an art test for Indians the revision failed in its purpose; the Indians based their judgment upon the utilitarian rather than upon the artistic characteristics of the objects and situations pictured.
- In 1930 The Meier-Seashore Art Judgement Test (A test designed to see ones artistic Ability).
It is important to note that neither of the last two tests actual determined actual learning in art though
Art textbooks written prior to the 1960s made little or no mention of assessment procedures. Some art education writers advocated the advancement of expressionistic creativity while others promoted the mental and physical growth potential of exposure to art processes.
Assessment of student learning in art education was, the most part, not a central focus. This earlier lack of emphasis on assessment in art education may have stemmed from the prevailing belief that art was not considered an academic discipline and, therefore, did not require the learning and assessment practices of core academic subjects.
(Observation strategies involve consistent surveillance of what students actually do during all phases of an art lesson: performance, attitude, work habits, and behavior in general. (Students Andy Siharath, seated, and Erica Reese.)
According to the National Art Education Visual Standards,
"Evaluation encompasses the global aspects of the Curriculum. Assessment, on the other hand, refers to more tightly focused measurements at the level of the individual student and his or her interactions within the art program. Assessment, therefore, measures student learning and evaluation measures program efficiency."
Measuring Student Learning in Art Education
DONALD D. GRUBER
Art Education
Vol. 61, No. 5 (September 2008) , pp. 40-45
Published by: National Art Education Association
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/20694756