Art-based education is something that has been debated for a very long time. The two sides to the argument being art should be implemented in every subject area or art should be completely cut from the program. But does art-based education really make a difference? Or does it distract from the actual curriculum? An article written by Andrew J. Schneller titled “Outcomes of art-based environmental education in the Hudson River Watershed” does a study in hopes to answer these questions. Schneller mentions that he believes “[t]he pedagogical tools available for teaching [art-based] environmental education are varied, allowing for innovation in classroom practise and instruction” (page 19). Art-based education is meant to help students grow in their creativity, critical thinking, and problem solving skills. The article mentions that learning with traditional pedagogy (taking notes, reading a textbook, answering questions, and then being tested) limits the opportunities students have to better understand the material. Schneller says that as time goes on, some educators are realizing the value of art-based methods and are even talking about different ways of approaching it in the curriculum. Instead of adding art classes to STEM, educators are saying STEM would be better off being added to an art curriculum. Art is beginning to be a much bigger priority but why? Why is art suddenly becoming a focus in the curriculum?
In the article, Schneller does a study of grades five and six students in upstate New York private schools. There were two groups. One group (the treatment group) had done the art-based program and other other group (the control group) did traditional pedagogy during their environmental class. Each group looked at the Hudson River Watershed, studying how the watershed works and how humans have affected it. The treatment group spent time creating a large mural of the watershed as well as doing other small art-based projects. The control group used traditional methods and learned only in the classroom. The results were astonishing. The treatment group scored twice as good as the control group. The treatment group’s knowledge scores improved from the pre-test to the post-test by 100% whereas the control group scores only improved by 25%. The mural and art projects helped them to understand how humans affect the watershed. They could visualize pollution and endangered species going extinct. One of the most interesting parts of the study was the parent response. One parent had asked her daughter what the project was about and the daughter answered that they were learning how to encourage people to keep the river clean. Surprised, the parent mentioned that she knew about the mural and figured her daughter would only want to talk about the art project side.
I would like to do some more research as a next step regarding art-based education. I think it can be added to much more than just the environmental curriculum and would like to find other studies to see its impact. Does art-based education really make a difference in how students learn in all subject areas or just environmental? Are all students understanding the required material or do art projects distract from the curriculum?
I am really looking forward to where you’ll take this topic as it is one that really interests me, I’m glad art based education is becoming of greater importance in the curriculum but it is an important point to add that it might not work for everyone. Visual learning certainly has it’s benefits and art making is able to stimulate students in a different way; allowing them to maybe become more open to thinking creatively. Creative thinking is a necessity in real life and by introducing more art based education, the students can think about a topic in a different way. One problem in creating works of art when discussing an important topic is it can take away from the topic itself as the students might tend to focus on the product.