Exploration 6: Reciprocal-Reflexivity (Action Research Plan)

When I began this course, I had a hard time envisioning the role Action Research could play in my online teaching. In fact, I was simply approaching this course as a means to understand and implement new and innovative methodologies to inform, improve and expand upon my current practices (i.e. action research;). Looking for simple technologies or techniques to implement, I did not see my activities as "research" for change. Little did I realize, that this was exactly what was taking place. As Karen Keifer-Boyd articulates in Critique, Advocacy, and Dissemination: I've Got the Data and the Findings, Now What?, action research is "a conscious effort to change conditions...a form of intervention into the public pedagogy of objects, signs, ideas, and practices of our everyday world" (Keifer-Boyd, 2012, p. 198). 

As a teacher, I desire to ignite an interest for art and art history within my students similar to and even greater than the one I experience. I want my students to leave my course as museum goers, supporters of the arts, locally and globally, and mindful of past, present and future cultures and how they are represented through the arts. Ultimately, I want them to be comfortable and confident with their new and/or expanded knowledge in such a way that allows for them to think, speak, and interact critically with the art they encounter and, in some cases, create. For students to explore and develop a voice of their own is the underlying goal of the courses I teach. Until now, I have encouraged this through discussion post interaction. Throughout this course, I have been slowly implementing and interjecting new technologies for students to explore as tools for reflection and expansion upon what they are learning. Through voluntary student participation, I have been able to explore and examine the potential of these media to motivate online dialogue making visible the networked ripples and interconnections of conversations beyond blog posts and replies. 

For this final exploration, I offered an opportunity for students to reinforce the knowledge they have gained in Art History 253 (a survey of Renaissance to Modern Art introduces students to the major stylistic tendencies and shifts within Western art history) as well as explore how art is an agent for change in the world, the United States and their own personal experiences. Utilizing the Art for Change Webquest I created for A ED 811, I asked students to complete a series of activities (that included readings, explorations, videos, searches, and reflections) that examine the communicative power of art. As this assignment was voluntary (and offered as extra credit), participation was (surprisingly) low. However, even the sparse participation has been extremely beneficial in working through the effectiveness and clarity of the webquest, namely the flow of the quest and how students can post their contributions and interact with others in this space.  

Getting Started for several of the students was actually the hardest part. None of the students had participated in an Webquest prior to this assignment and without clear guidelines or expectations, several expressed frustration and confusion as to how to begin the quest. Students were first asked to read an article on Achieving Social Change Through Art and watch a video of Iranian female artist, Shirin Neshat. While doing so, they were to reflect on these questions: 

How does or can an artist use his or her position as an artist to start conversations, challenge thinking, and reverse stereotypes, injustice or discrimination

What qualities and characteristics does art have that make it an ideal conduit for change?

Do you see instances where artists go too far in their efforts to challenge perspectives? Or even the opposite, artists who are too conservative in their work?

Where do you see art utilized to bring about change like this in the US? Are there existing social issues in the US that call for this extreme activism? With these questions as your base, compare and contrast her work with that of  an artist working in the US today. 

These responses were documented in blog format, some posted directly to the Webquest blog, others emailed their responses to me. Here is a sampling of their reflections: 

One student reflected "artwork has a magnificent impact to political and social change in America and in other countries. An artist can use his/her position to ignite conversation and debate on specific topics through the development of a unique style and purpose in each creation. Political art is one of the most powerful forms of art due to its ability to express the issues or topics of the governmental realm of the country. An artist can depict objects or use arbitrary colors or develop emotional paintings in order to start conversation and challenge the daily thought process of an average citizen."

Another expressed that art "must have slight controversy to it or it will not bring about deep thought and emotion."

Another described Neshat's work as "capturing the raw emotion of the public, in particular women."

Common ideas that appeared in these posts include: audience, impact, subject matter (i.e. "villain and hero), standard for art, "ever changing ideas," challenging injustices, conversation starters, therapeutic, and advertising.

One student observed that "our culture is by far more conservative than other countries, possibly because of the freedom[s] we possess, which makes the need for rising to issues seem unimportant or unnecessary...[when] in fact, art that expresses the struggles and obstacles of the government are [in her opinion] the strongest and most appealing art...." 

As quoted in Keifer-Boyd's article, "Critical action research toward social justice advocacy emphasizes a 'commitment to social transformation, challenging power relations, showing solidarity, recognizing and using emotions, being the change you want to see, and building spaces for critical dialogue'" (Keifer-Boyd, 2012, p. 198). This initial exploration illustrates the beginning of this process for my students. They are beginning to pinpoint areas in which art can function as an agent of change, examine how it serves to function this way in their own experience, and start to dialogue (ideally) with one another about art's role in this capacity. With the reading and video as a prompt, students take a closer look at the role of political art in the US and abroad while comparing, contrasting and critiquing its effectiveness. 

Unfortunately, the blog forum on the Webquest was not conducive to student interaction. Therefore, students worked singularly and did not interact with one another. I am still exploring how to foster a more participatory culture within this space.

In the next step, Make Change Happen, students were asked to brainstorm and reflect upon social issues where immediate change is necessary. This activity allowed for students to brainstorm issues, select one of personal interest, and explore ways in which that issue is already being addressed in art, by activist groups, etc. Students discussed a variety of topics: politics, inequality, discrimination, rape, bullying, education, war, poverty, arranged marriages, human trafficking, homelessness, propaganda, hunger, respect, and stereotypes, just to name a few. Students could utilize any form to display their brainstorm and reflections. Here are a few examples: 

"DISCRIMINATION: an unjustifiable reason why someone is denied or allowed certain things;
based on gender, race, sexuality, or economic status, etc." 

"EDUCATION: a vital part of childhood, enabling children to mature into productive members of society. Unfortunately, it has become so far removed from its original intent, it has become something that does more harm than intended -- as it places more emphasis on teachers and school systems than the students it should be helping." 

"BULLIES: people who put down and make fun of others to cover up their own insecurities. Not OK in any setting."

The research unearthed by this step of the process indicated that students moved outside of the bounds of the webquest and its resources for their information. Students looked to social networking sites (Facebook), non-profit groups (American Civil Liberties Union and Students First), as well as popular artists such as Banksy. Students also made connections to artists working in other industries, such as fashion. 

The Next Step, students were asked to further reflect on their research using these questions:

What do you SEE?

What do you THINK?

What do you KNOW?

What do you FEEL? 

Students were then asked to create a piece of digital art that addressed the issue they selected and articulated their responses to these questions. They could utilize the internet for tools and websites useful in creating online/digital art and could display their work in any (but not limited to) of the following forms: slide show, video, single image, sound bytes, voice, text, etc. Asking students to translate the information that they had gathered into an art form of their own was both intimidating (for some) and challenging (as many are not self-described "artists"). As this project was optional, most skipped this end exploration. However, a few did give additional voice to their causes. 

Instead of creating her own piece, one student selected this image by Banksy to illustrate her "cause."

In reflecting upon my current methodologies and this project, I was struck by an observation Keifer-Boyd made of student participation with avatars in virtual environments: "Most students find that the chat discussion removes some of the obstacles found in face-to-face discussion, such as having too little time for all to speak, too little time to reflect prior to contributing before the topic changes, or being too self-conscious to speak out. Those who have found their voice privileged in physical encounters are often initially resistant to the dialogue in virtual text-based approaches" (2012, p. 200). Many of my students, as well as myself, are still learning to navigate the virtual classroom. Finding a comfortable space to speak out, participate, and engage is challenging in that it requires a desire to connect with those around us, confidence in what you have to contribute and the assurance that you are participating in a safe space. Online courses offer flexibility in schedule and the opportunity for students to complete course work in a fashion that best suits their lifestyle and schedules. Within this structure, it is easy for students to remain disconnected from one another.  Instead of being discouraged by the low participation, I am challenged to investigate more inclusive methods into my "research" that will motivate students to interact with one another and collectively develop their "voice" while at the same time "making visible inequitable power relations, dialogue, reflection, and collective production" in an effort to "[change] perspectives" (Keifer-Boyd, 2012, p.  198).  

Resources: 

Keifer-Boyd, K. ( 2012). Critique, advocacy and dissemination: I've got the data and the findings, now what? In S. Klein (Ed.), Action research: Plain and simple (pp. 197-215). New York City, NY: Palgrave.

Exploration 5: Embodied Sculpted Analysis

Moving in SLOOOOOOOOOOW MOOOOOOOTION.

ME: “Who likes to play games?” Children: “Me!” “Me!” “Me!”

This exercise was a bit challenging in both its inception as well as its application. As my students never meet in a physical classroom, I was forced to look into my personal daily life for ways to execute this exploration.  Fortunately, I have two tiny little subjects with a few fun-spirited friends: my children. For this exploration, I arranged for four playdates: one at a park, two at my house, and one at a friend’s house. Subjects varied in gender, age, and ethnicity from playdate to playdate. Four children were present at all four playdates. Four others were able to attend only one of the playdates. Each playdate consisted of 4 to 5 children ranging in age from two years to seven years. Subjects were predominantly female (5 females and 3 males).  Ethnicities represented include Caucasian (5), African American (1), and Spanish (European) (2).

Observing the children on our local playground, I noticed many tended to move in circles throughout the playground, gravitating to other children of the same age, gender and ethnicity. Sometimes another, more extroverted, child, would break into one of these circles for a time, sometimes to stay and sometimes for only a short period of time. These trends seem to be more prevalent in older children (which may be because they come to the park with or to meet a specific friend or friends). Younger children tended to move a bit more singularly throughout their play infusing themselves into others play and incorporating new friends into their circles depending upon the activity and excitement level.

From these observations, I started to wonder: Are young children more interested in the process or the people with whom they are interacting? How can a challenging situation introduce problem solving and encourage collaborative play? How can the teacher (or facilitator, in this case) encourage or discourage group cooperation and collaboration? And how can I use Boal’s games to gather such information?

First, how can I use Boal’s games to gather such information? Taking Vygotsky’s Zone of Proximal Development into consideration, I looked for exercises in which the children would physically interact with each other in a series of “scaffolded” activities. From Boal’s games, I selected the Cross and the Circle, Equilibrium of the body within an object, and Slow Motion from the category Feeling What We Touch. The age of the children participating in this activity determined the activities selected and focused on during the playdates. Not all children had the same verbal, mental, social, or even physical skills. However, I felt confident that (with the exception of the two year old) all participants could be successful and engage in each of these “games” with a little modification. Each “game” (as we called them) was broken down into a series of smaller steps that were repeated until the child became confident to move forward to the more challenging activity. For example, we repeated making a circle and cross separately several times before attempting to put them together. During each playdate, we moved through the three activities (some more successfully than others, some more quickly than others) and concluded with a “drawing” of how the “games” made them feel.

Equilibrium of the Body with an Object: The Hula-Hoop

Are young children more interested in the process or the people with whom they are interacting? The first attempt felt like a flop. Quickly one child (age 3) was frustrated with the challenge of putting the cross and circle together. Once she noticed that she was making the same motion with each hand, she suggested “we do the Hokey Pokey” instead. Of course, all agreed and a delightful song and dance to the Hokey Pokey ensued. Next, using a ball, sidewalk chalk, and hula-hoops children explored the relationships of their bodies to the objects and to others moving around them. The idea of  “game play” was so exciting this turned into a “hula hoop contest” initiated by the six year old (the most efficient “hooper” in the group).  The “slow motion” game was arguably the most popular with all of the groups. While challenging, it was attainable with the proper self-restraint.

How can a challenging situation introduce problem solving and encourage collaborative play? As the play dates progressed and the “core group” became more familiar with the exercises, something interesting happened. In some of the activities, they would help each other. The older child offered to move one child’s hand in a circle while the child moved her own hand in a “T” (the group collectively renamed the cross). The “slow motion” exercise became a competitive game in which the children would experiment with various ways of moving slowly (i.e. backwards, side ways, etc). Children watched one another more as they became more familiar with the activities. They began to transform the activities into something more “exciting.” While I am not sure if it was the age or enthusiasm of the individuals or the mere labeling of the activities as “games” but the children seemed to always shift the activities into competitions of some sort. It was my observation that this was their way of making sense of the activity. One child (6) even asked “why are we doing this?” As their levels of thinking are more concrete and less conceptual (to some degree), each child sought to understand the purpose of the game by how it related to him/her and/or to those around him/her. While the play groups where small to begin with, children would break into further groups of two or three based upon 1) age, 2) energy level, 3) interest in the activity, and 4) gender. Females did not prefer females over males in the smaller groups. However, males did seem to gravitate toward one another more frequently than their female counterparts. Ethnicity did not seem to matter. However, this may be in part to the low number of participants. Energy and interest level seemed to be the major factor in determining with whom and how the children interacted. The older child did seem to be more frustrated with the younger children as her efforts to control the group were thwarted or met with disinterest.

How can the teacher (or facilitator, in this case) encourage or discourage group cooperation and collaboration? As the facilitator of these activities, I attempted to remain neutral after introducing the “game” and let the children take it from there. This posed a significant challenge after the first introduction when one child shifted the entire activity into the “hokey pokey.” I quickly realized that I could subtly be in-control leading and directing the activities while the children still felt safe and in-control of their own decisions and choices within the activity. As a teacher, facilitator, etc., it is imperative that you are able to “read” your students, intuitive about the situation and provide an atmosphere that fosters and encourages diversity of opinion and thought. Each of these children was exploring his or her ability, space, and relationship within the activity and to one another. The activities were challenging and avenues for further exploration. Their energy and creativity pushed them to investigate the core components of the “games” and move beyond them. While many of their diversions seemed to be "chasing rabbits" they were still tangential to the core activity.

 

When analyzing discussing the post-activity drawings with each child, I noticed the responses fell into a few specific categories: place, people and feelings. The reflections also tended to be less emotional and more recollection and documentation. Some of the reflections included:

Image 1: “This is me with a hula-hoop around my head and those are birds flying into a nest. The hoop was my favorite. It made me excited.” (We were in a heavily wooded area with engaging wild life).

Image 2: “That’s the house. We were at a house, not a park. I like the park better.”

Image 4: “This is Sam. He was beside me in the slow motion game. He was slower than me."

Image 1: “[All of these games] made me want to play hopscotch. Here is my hopscotch.”

Image 2: “I drew on the trampoline…Windows on the trampoline…next time I want to jump on the trampoline.” 

Image 3: “This is my name. See I can write my whole name. This is me. [Tell me how you are feeling as you draw this?] Frustrated that they didn’t want to play my game.”

Image 1: “This is the circle. The hula hoop. The green is the spinning. [The circles] are Asher, Liza, Imani, and Sam.”

Image 2: “This is me. [That hand] is the T and that [hand] is the circle. [What are the lines over the top?] Sweat.”

Image 3: “I wrote letters because I am tired.”

Image 4: “This is my happy dance.”

Exploration 4: Layered Analysis

“Teaching transforms into learning, and back again to teaching.”

Jean McNiff

Teaching as learning, an action research approach

Research Question (as posed by Mary Elizabeth Meier): As participants share their documentation with the inquiry group and engage in dialogue, what indicates shifts in thinking about teaching and learning?

Layer One: Code to Disassemble and Reassemble

Scene I: Reflecting on One Year of Collaborative Inquiry Group Work

Scene II: Planning for/Reflections on “Innovations in Art”

Scene III: Sharing Documentation and Reflections

Scene IV: Blog posts by Collaborative Inquiry Group Participants

·      Questioning//Uncertainty

·      Collaboration//Shared Experiences

·      Self-Reflection//Adaptation

Layer 2: Inquiry Prose

<<Questioning --> Collaboration --> Reflection --> Questioning>>

Throughout Mary Elizabeth Meier’s Story Constellations, members of the collaborative inquiry group seemed to speak in cyclical patterns moving from “questioning” to group “collaboration” to self and group “reflection.” At times these processes worked simultaneously, while at other times they followed a more linear path. Repeatedly members made statements referencing how the work of others and the work of the group influenced and affected their professional development. The theme of “questioning” runs throughout the entire project, beginning with creating a “big question.” A question that seeks to answer how to create an environment rich in student led learning within each participant’s context.

Thoughts on Questioning: Conversation and documentation throughout the constellation returned to inquiry, the “big question.” Within this questioning, themes of uncertainty, hesitancy, skepticism, continually surfaced. Some of these included fear of technology, the questioning process, uncertainty within an individual’s classroom setting, etc.

Thoughts on Collaboration (and shared experiences): The group as a whole seem to function as a sounding board for participants who entered the program feeling like they were already a “lonely island” acting as one person making up an entire department. The connections made within the group illustrate vulnerability, eagerness to learn and apply, trust, respect and willing contribution.  “Almost every meeting, I picked up something to take back with me” – “Technology” – “Teaching styles” – “how each of us was working…how I could do that…see if I could modify” – “hearing about your experience” – “you were so helpful…in helping me think about [list of courses]” – “sharing…taking ideas and moving along with them.” Each of these quotes from participants articulate the collaboration experienced, intentionally and unintentionally, throughout the study.

Thoughts on Self-Reflection/Reflection (and adaptation): Collaboration yielded self-reflection at the point of collaboration as well as when participants sought to share their own experiences. During self-reflection, evidence of shifts in thinking is verbalized. Although only one participant used the term “shift in thinking” others eluded to the process throughout their dialogue.  “Before I had only thought of…” – “…changed along the way for me.” – “I can see it coming together…I am still seeing a bigger picture.”

Layer 3: Reflexivity and Encompassing Metaphors

The process of questioning, collaborating, and reflecting proves to be a constant challenge of value and belief systems of the individual educator. At the moment the question is addressed a new question forms. The process is ongoing and uncertainties continue to arise. One participant observed “if you don’t have uncertainty or something that you are looking to define or know more about, then you don’t have a conflict or a question.” Jean McNiff states that in the process of question and answer, “the nature of the answer is not the end phase of a previous question, but the beginning of a new question. The process of question and answer is not to lead to a fixed ‘truth proof’, but to lead to a continuing dialogue, in which the understanding of each party moves forward” (McNiff 1993, p 29). The dialogue between the educators in the CIG is not final. Rather it continues throughout the process with no right or wrong answers, but instead “right” questions (McNiff 1993, 44). These questions lead to action and experimentation and back to reflection for advanced and improved pedagogical practice.

Layer 4: Seeing Patterns as Major Themes

One of the greatest evidences of shift in thinking about learning and teaching can be seem in changes of practices implemented, whether successfully or not, by participants in their respective classrooms. The blog posts chronicling the past year speak to the growth and challenges of the participants. As participant, Rachel, guides the group on a journey through her student’s self-portraiture, she illustrates how her students were challenged to think and create as individuals pushing the boundaries of their own creativity and perceived limitations. Rachel, as an educator, also experienced the same discomfort and challenge from the process as she assumed the role of teacher observer instead of her traditional position in the classroom. 

The data seems to point to the fact that when teachers “get to figure out [their] own professional development…get to decide what [they] want to learn” more effective change occurs and teachers become students who then become teachers sharing and replicating their experiences and processes within their classroom. One participant articulated this with the statement “what happened to me this year is what I am trying to do for my kids too.”

Teachers are owners of their own educational knowledge. They may share this knowledge with others, by demonstrating its internal validity in that they are able to live out their educational values. Peers may accept (or not) this knowledge as valid, by discussing the claim to knowledge of the individual, and sharing it by adopting or adapting it (or not) to themselves. In this way, those peers also create their own educational knowledge. In this way are constituted dialogical communities of self-reflective practitioners who share the same values base as a shared way of life

(McNiff 1993, p 45).

“…enquiry by the self of self…enabling individuals to develop their own personal theories.” – Jean McNiff (1993, p 17)

My personal layered analysis:

Currently the largest component of peer-to-peer interaction in my online course is the discussion board. Students make weekly contributions to the conversation regarding the most recent material covered in class. Half-way through this semester, students were asked to reflect upon this process. I typically have students do this at the end of semester; however, I am experimenting with the placement of this assignment to determine if by having students reflect midway through the semester they can see and address any areas that could use improvement or be challenged to contribute in a new and more innovative way. This layered analysis is based on a random sampling of their submissions to this assignment.

Layer 1: Code to Disassemble and Reassemble

The discussion reflection is based on all contributions to the discussion board and includes your original posts and responses to others. In the reflection, you are to analyze your comments while reflect on your written ideas and interactions with others. As you are reading, critically analyze your comments objectively—imagine that you’re reading posts written by someone else. Comment on what you notice and what reflections arise as you read. Also, feel free to cite any original course content. Please be thoughtful and directed with your analysis and consider some of the following questions as you are writing:

What do you usually write about in your posts?

Are there broad themes or specific issues that keep appearing in your writing?

Has the nature of your posts changed over the semester?

What changes do you notice in your writing?

What surprised you as you reread your work?

What ideas or comments in your posts would you revisit?

How do feel you’ve contributed to the online learning community through the discussion board?

What else do you notice?

What aspects of the weekly discussion do you value most, and how does it show up in your posts?

Layer 2: Inquiry Prose

Class submissions were not due until this past weekend (based on my course schedule from the beginning of the semester); therefore, I have not been able to spend as much time analyzing these as I would like or plan.

Thus far I can trace three consistent threads of thought in each of the submissions: the challenge faced by students, the expectations of themselves and their peers, and the engagement (or lack of) with the material through the discussion posts.

The challenge most articulated was a fear of rejection, especially once students realized their peers were utilizing the forum to connect with each other and they actually valued the contributions. (Note: each student was required to post at least two responses to their peers’ posts. Therefore, evidence of interaction and value can be found within these posts. However, the posts are not a part of this analysis.) “Will my classmates think my ideas are stupid?” “Am I interpreting this artwork in the right way?”

Although the discussion guidelines were clearly defined at the beginning of the course, some students admitted to having reservations about posting and some failed to see how such conversations could enlighten their experience at all. “The use of a discussion board for an art history class does not seem like the best method to learn more about artwork.”  Aside from being required to complete the task, students had relatively low expectations of themselves or their peers regarding the discussion posts.  One student states “I was not very cognizant that I was actually trying to engage my classmates in my posts.” Another alluded to the idea of classmates waiting on the “first responders” of the board in order to fashion a response.  However, this was not always the case. As students became more comfortable with the process and their peers, they “became more and more interested in what [others] were saying.” One student relished this opportunity to “socialize about” the content.

By reflecting on each of their past posts, students acknowledge that a certain degree of knowledge of the subject as well as interaction with the material is required to 1) create a post that fully explores the prompt and 2) is interesting to other classmates.

Layer 3: Reflexivity and Encompassing Metaphors

In the online classroom, students must take the initiative and control of their learning experience.  One student shared of the reflection process that “the one thing that surprised me most about [rereading the discussion posts] was what I am actually learning in this class…. Not only is it helping me to improve my posts but it has opened my eyes to the way that art is associated with lifestyles of societies and can represent what was going on during the period in which it was created. I believe that a piece of art is an expression of an artist, but I did not previously associate it with what may be going on globally or locally as seems to be the case….” Many have expressed freedom to articulate their opinions as the semester continued. Others admitted to keeping to the “topic at hand” in order to “promote and not hinder discussion.” Some have even discovered that it is in these tangential spaces that great discussions can ignite.

Layer 4: Seeing Patterns as Major Themes

Students seem to be trying to place themselves within the context of the course. Exploring how they compare to others, how they want to be perceived by others. A name without a face is still a name, a person; therefore they seem to be highly sensitive to how they “interact” with one another. A sort of etiquette develops among the students on the discussion board were “I am able to give my own opinions about a subject without someone telling me I’m wrong or right, because it is my opinion” while still trying to “get ideas stirring by commenting on other people’s posts.” They demonstrate growth as they move past the fear of rejection and build confidence as they go public with their ideas and open themselves up to the scrutiny of their peers.

Confession: As I read and reflect upon the thoughts of my students, I am becoming keenly aware that it may not be the class that is “bored” by the structure of the course. Perhaps, it is actually me. I still plan to implement a plan to utilize technology to aid students in finding their “voice” through the interpretation of art. However, rather than reinventing the wheel, I need to evaluate where my students are and work from that point. A natural tendency for people working in an already unfamiliar space (or even a familiar but comfortable one) is to resist change.

Resources: 

McNiff, J, (1993). teaching as learning an action research approach. London: Routledge.

Exploration 3: Narrative Inquiry

"Our rituals of interhuman communication make special that which we value most and want to share. These rituals bind us to one another in a life lived together.  In our mutual search for knowledge, our stories show us another way of seeing and understanding" - Elizabeth M. Delacruz

Artworks are such a beautiful resource for self-reflection. In order to help my students develop their own voice, I am utilizing Voice Thread as a platform for students to explore a personal experience in their lives through a piece of art that we are studying this semester. By exploring the piece and its points of connection with their own lives, students gain insight and understanding into the artist, his/her intent, while imagining the possible meanings of the piece. This process aids students in developing a "relationship" with the piece of art as well as those who view, comment and critique their exploration. This examination of self also encourages students to find relevance in art where they may not have seen it before. This self awareness, as Sheri Klein contends, is "necessary for breaking one's silence and moving toward public disclosure of one's personal and professional struggles that can no longer remain private." This disclosure is a step in the process of finding their voice.  Using one of my own personal experiences at the beach on Kiawah Island, South Carolina, I explore and connect with the Edward Potthast painting of four little girls frolicking at the beach on summer holiday, Children at the Beach. This piece has additional personal meaning for me as it was previously a part of  the Westervelt Warner private collection (my former employer). Having had the opportunity to see it almost daily for the years of my tenure there, I experienced deep emotion when revisiting it for this assignment. This visual exploration is a mix of music, video, text, and images sewn together using Voice Thread. 

Here is my own visual exploration of Edward Potthast's Children at the Beach, 1910

Here is the voice thread link, just in case you cannot access the embedded video above.

http://voicethread.com/share/5468572/


Resources:

Educational Agents for Positive Change

2011 © Sheri Klein, Elizabeth Delacruz, Karen Keifer-Boyd

Exploration 2: Arts-Based Research

a picture is worth a thousand words

Only months after my grandfather passed away, our family started to notice signs of dementia in my grandmother’s behavior. They were small at first: misplaced milk in the cabinet and forgotten hair appointments. Simple things, really, that are easily attributed to old age. Eventually, her “forgetfulness” could not be overlooked. Open flames left on the stovetop, cigarettes left burning in the ashtray, and the doors unlocked and ajar forced us all to take a closer look at the once spirited and independent matriarch of our family. She was clinically diagnosed with Alzheimer’s disease in 1999. Her decline was slow. Her short-term memory was the first to go. She seemed to have no memories from after my grandfather’s death. Her personality calmed and the feisty opinionated woman we all knew seemed to disappear behind the sweet quiet smile of this new person. Many people did not even know she had dementia. She was amiable and carried on conversations with ease. Only those who really knew her or spent long periods of time with her could recognize holes in her stories or repetitive speech. I was one of the few people she remembered. Possibly because she was an integral part of my childhood. She first introduced me to art. I still cherish her box of paints and brushes. She taught me how to explore the world around me through those very tools. She drew upon my own talents and shared her love of painting. In her dementia, she forgot this love.

But maybe she didn't have to....

Growing research has illuminated the positive connection between the arts and dementia, specifically Alzheimer’s disease. While there is no cure, many find their voice, their normalcy, and their connectivity through interacting with art. 

Meet Me, the MoMA Alzheimer’s Project, was created in order to serve the growing population affected by Alzheimer’s disease and other forms of dementia.  Through specialized tours, participants and their caregivers are given opportunity to connect, dialogue, observe, interpret, and create works of art.

Meet Me provides a safe and nurturing environment for people in the early stages of Alzheimer's disease or dementia to look at and talk about selected pieces within the MoMA collection. The program extends the experience to include art making in a classroom setting and is not limited to two-dimensional art. Music, ballroom dancing, poetry, and other hands-on experiences are offered as extensions of the program as well. Men and women meet once a month in small private groups reserved especially for participants in the program. Trained museum educators move with the groups throughout the galleries engaging with the art in a predetermined sequence. Participants engage with the works of art, the educator, each other, and their caregivers to find meaning, reminisce, explore self, develop connections, and create positive experiences. The facilitator (museum educator) plays a vital role in creating a safe environment in which participants feel at ease to contribute. According to a study of the program by NYU, the intellectual stimulation, social interaction and emotional carryover has made a statistically significant difference in the lives of participants.

Meet Me seems to have been designed to utilize the arts-based research subcategory Arts-inquiry to offer participants a space to move comfortably through the process of understanding themselves and finding a voice. As quoted in Karen Keifer-Boyd's Arts-based Research as Social Justice Activism, it is through this voice that "ideas, emotions, and experiences are critically analyzed and made public" (Keifer-Boyd, 2011, p. 4). Participating in art viewing, interpreting, and creating stimulates the senses, triggers dormant memories and gives participants an opportunity to articulate themselves. Dementia patients are not only trying to connect with those around them, they are trying to reconnect with themselves. Their sense of identity may have been loss or seems to be slipping away. Meet Me provides a way for them to explore and see the changing world around them from a familiar place. “Arts-based inquiry is a reconstitution of self in the act of learning about lives in which the personal is understood and contextualized as political.” (Keifer-Boyd, 9). Through arts-inquiry dementia patients are able to participate in self analysis. This autoethnography, articulated through observing or creating art, provides the tools necessary to “explain self to others” (Keifer-Boyd, 2011, 9). The ability to "explain self" can be incredibly liberating to participants as problems with language and abstract thinking are common effects of dementia.  

Arts-based research "involves continual critical reflexivity in response to injustice" (Keifer-Boyd, 2011, p 3). Programs, such as Meet Me, have forced institutions like MoMA to take a closer look at how they make the arts accessible to all of their patrons especially those that are traditionally marginalized. The development and dissemination of The MoMA Alzheimer's Project to museums and organizations across the country exhibits this community's "commitment to social transformation, challenging power relations, showing solidarity, recognizing and using emotions, being the change you want to see, and building space for critical dialogue"(Chatterton, Fuller, & Routledge, 2007, p. 222 as quoted in Keifer-Boyd, 2011, p. 6). 

Problem Statement: While the students I teach do not suffer from dementia, many are searching to find a voice. Each of my courses consists of high school students new to the college experience, traditional students utilizing the online component of UA's educational system, and non-traditional students pursuing their degrees remotely. In my virtual classroom, students interact asynchronously mostly through text. The purpose of my focused arts-based action research is to explore and implement visual tools and technologies such as Voice Thread and avatars to encourage students to "find their voice" within the context of my course. By interpreting (reinterpreting) themselves through the art we study, students will begin to discover, explore and develop their own voice. Additionally, as students interact with one another they will begin to identify with their peers and work and move more synchronously through their virtual experience.  

Finding Voice Concept Map

Resources:

http://www.moma.org/meetme/index

94-Year-Old Seattle Alzheimer&#039;s Patient Discovers New Artistic Talent. (n.d.). Retrieved February 6, 2014, from http://kuow.org/post/94-year-old-seattle-alzheimers-patient-discovers-new-artistic-talent

Art Therapy for Alzheimer’s. (n.d.). ALZinfo.org. Retrieved February 6, 2014, from https://www.alzinfo.org/05/articles/prevention-and-wellness-21

Fields, J., & Lemonick, M. (n.d.). The Woman With No Memory. Time. Retrieved from http://science.time.com/2013/10/24/the-woman-with-no-memory/

Grady, D. (2006, October 24). Self-Portraits Chronicle a Descent Into Alzheimer’s. The New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/24/health/24alzh.html

Keifer-Boyd, K. (2011). Arts-based research as social justice activism: Insight, inquiry, imagination, embodiment, relationality. International Review of Qualitative Research, 5(1), 3-19.

Rankin, K. P., Liu, A. A., Howard, S., Slama, H., Hou, C. E., Shuster, K., & Miller, B. L. (2007). A case-controlled study of altered visual art production in Alzheimer’s and FTLD. Cognitive and behavioral neurology: official journal of the Society for Behavioral and Cognitive Neurology, 20(1), 48–61. doi:10.1097/WNN.0b013e31803141dd

Why Art Therapy is Good for the Alzheimer’s Brain. (n.d.-a). Senior Living News and Trends | A Place for Mom. Retrieved February 7, 2014, from http://www.aplaceformom.com/blog/2013-10-31-art-therapy-good-for-brain/

Visualization to visualize theory and practice

The event. Summer of 2006. First graduate teaching assignment. ARH 252. Stonehenge.

The space. Typical classroom. Not a lecture hall, as the classes were small that summer. Or at least mine were. Students seated at desks lined up in rows. Me, the instructor, standing tall and firm behind a podium positioned slightly to the right of the projector screen. I was still using a circular slide projector. Teaching as most of my art history professors before me: lecture style. Students listen. I regurgitate mounds of information, the mundane mixed with interesting, funny, references to pop culture. Front row: student challenges the information that I was presenting about Stonehenge. Information that was a conglomerate of the text and what I had been taught. My response: this information is correct to the best of my knowledge and "according to your text." Student: well, I've been there. And this is what I know. 

My identity as defined by this event. At this moment, I was met with both a personal and professional challenge. The personal (and professional) challenge was to know and familiarize myself with as much content regarding the material I was teaching and the professional challenge was to learn how to productively facilitate discussions in such situations and encourage students to "challenge" and contribute to what their instructors were saying. Help students find a voice. 

Art is a very powerful medium both as a means of creation and a vehicle for understanding. Unfortunately, the discipline of art history has the reputation of being elitist and irrelevant. Many fail to see the overall merits of the discourse. While the value of art history may not be apparent at first glance to my students, it is my goal to aid each one in seeing it as a discipline in which they can better understand the visual world around them, past, present and future. Therefore, this "open" microphone symbolizes me as an instructor as I seek to work through my teaching philosophy: By engaging students in the act of looking and creating a space in which constructive and open dialogue can develop, I use art and art history to teach and reinforce conversation, expand language, develop observation skills, cultivate visual literacy, encourage critical thinking, and build confidence in viewers as they come to see and believe that they have valuable and relevant contributions to the conversation at hand.

Taking Action. As I stated in my earlier post, I am no longer in this traditional setting. I am teaching exclusively online courses. Courses that are designed by another. Dialogue can be facilitated and encouraged through discussion exercises built into the course. However, interaction is limited to posts and replies and email through blackboard. My issue at hand is still how and where to insert relevant tools (i.e. social media) into my courses to encourage participation and continuous dialogue.