In this week’s visual arts workshop, we explored the idea of uniformity in art education in schools. Uniformity can be found in a variety of forms in education: uniformity of materials, of tools, and of expectations regarding the “final product”. While it can be argued that uniformity cannot be helped – after all, we can only work with the tools we are given, right? – this workshop encouraged us to consider small but worthwhile changes we could make in visual arts education that have the potential to make visual arts more meaningful to children.

In this workshop, rather than being shown a picture and handed a piece of paper and brush identical to everyone else’s, and being asked to paint our own version of the picture shown, we took a step back. Before we even thought about painting, we were given an hour to create our own paintbrush.

We were encouraged to think about the benefits of allowing the children the time to create their own brush. First, it can inspire a certain level of investment in the creative process. Personally, I found this to be true when creating my own brush. Simply creating the brush had its own design elements, as we were free to choose size, materials and the overall look of our brush, making each one totally unique. There may be some similarities in design and the way in which materials are used, but each brush was unique to the person who made it. I think this would be a beneficial approach to art in classrooms, as I think it could lend a sense of ownership to children, not only of the brush itself, but of any work produced using it.

It also avoids encouraging children to compare their work to that of others in the class. This ties back to a previous workshop, where we looked at the archive of primary artwork. Often in schools, we encounter a decline in children’s willingness to be original or to try new things in visual arts, which can be seen in particular in the older chidren’s artwork. This could in part be attributed to the notion of “talent” or “giftedness” in terms of art, where it is perceived that only art which is “good” has any sort of value. We should be encouraging children to take pride in their own work, whatever form it may take, without subscribing to ideas of talent or artistic skill.

If children are allowed to invest time into creating their own tools, they will be well aware that all of the tools produced are different, and therefore cannot be expected to produce exactly the same kinds of marks or end product. This is something I personally identified with. Before beginning this course, I was not particularly confident in my own artistic ability. This was because I did mostly believe in traditional ideas of talent and ability. I like to doodle, and to draw a little, but I am not what I would call talented in the arts. Part of this view is due to the attitude I developed in school, where classmates clearly demonstrated more talent than I did, and so I never really bothered to continue with art or gave it much consideration. I am wholly against passing on this mindset to the children I will teach however, and this module has given me some ideas as to ways in which I can avoid doing so.

Below are a few steps towards creating my brush.

While creating my brush, it was interesting to consider the materials I chose, and the reasons I had for choosing them. I chose to keep my brush simple, as extra additions would have been counter-productive to creating for me. I chose two different brush ends made from different materials, in order to allow two different possibilities for mark making and texture in painting, and I chose to wrap the handle in wool in order to make it more comfortable to hold. Allowing children to make the same considerations, I think, allows them to create a tool which suits their ideas and is comfortable for them to use. This too, I think, can encourage children to take more care when producing art with their own tools.

In addition to this, we were not shown a picture and expected to reproduce it exactly – which would have been impossible given the nature of our brushes – but rather, an image was described to us. This gives the class the same initial stimulus, but the production of a painting was entirely down to interpretation of the description. This led to a great variety in the paintings produced in our class, which again, removes the urge for comparison among students. Between interpretation and different tools, it was impossible for there to be a situation in which two people produced exactly the same image. If I am able to teach visual art whilst on placement this year, I hope to try this method with my class and build on and improve my practice in creative arts education.

Our second workshop was Music, and we were looking at figure notes. As someone who already has some ability in reading sheet music, adapting to using figure notes with tuned percussion was fairly straightforward. I think using figure notes can be beneficial in a classroom in initially introducing children to music, and provides a gradual progression to using standard notation. I believe using the figure notes allows for the development of understanding of musical notation, before making the transition to standard notation, which can be difficult to follow when it is first encountered.

We also did a little improvisation exercise using a pentatonic scale (CDEGA) and tuned percussion. Our lecturer played a part of Hit The Road Jack, which we were then to individually improvise a short 4-bar section for. This was quite a good exercise, I thought, as it demonstrates that anyone can improvise with music, whether they can play an instrument, read sheet music or not. I think this would be a worthwhile exercise to spend time on with a class, as it does not rely on traditional notions of talent, as previously discussed.

We were also introduced to Charanga Music Resource, which has a great deal of resources and term-spanning lesson plans. I found this to be an excellent resource, and definitely beneficial for teachers who are not particularly confident in their own musical ability.