Figure 2 serves as an illustration of an approach to analysis that ‘emphasises the social origins of mental functioning’ (Ring, 2006, p. In this instance the group had a shared cultural identity but the adult was willing to listen to and accept each child’s unpredictable choices for representing a variety of referents. Rogoff (2003) suggests that moving beyond personal systems of assumption (how a child’s drawing skills should progress schematically) relies upon recognition that each culture has quite different conceptual understandings of human development. Throughout the drawing episode she asked questions about what should be drawn, and the children responded to this by directing her about what they wanted included. Importantly the adult did not try to impose a monocultural visual representation system on the children, but instead allowed them to explore their own systems for representing. The drawers have worked together to explore the stimulus concept, without it containing obviously ‘adult’ and ‘child’ schema. One child was extremely preoccupied with a dense overworking of oil pastel over a small area of the paper, while another child drew a linear deconstruction of the leopard character, separating fur markings, eyes, and body shape. Components of the drawing have distinct differences, although they aren’t sitting separately on the paper. For example, one child randomly referenced her cubby house (Wendy house) at home, while another referenced an illustration of the leopard seen in the picture book. Because the drawing was produced collaboratively, the image contains many varied visual responses. The drawing explored basic literacy concepts relating to character and narrative development based on this reading. The stimulus behind this work was the reading of a children’s picture book about a chameleon that tricks a crocodile and a leopard. This example also shows how both adults and children can transform their ways of using of tools – in this case, the drawing implements and surface material. Through the initiation and observations of this collaborative drawing event, where adults and children drew together in an early childhood classroom, it is possible to gain glimpses into the child’s cultural practices. Figure 1 shows a drawing that was produced over 19 minutes by an adult staff member and three children (aged three to four years). In the fine arts, postmodern forms of practice have forced a move from the historical model of apprenticeship, whereby the young apprentice learnt his artistry through intense observation of the Master, to a discursively driven form of training based upon conceptual ideas (Cook, 1999, p. Although collaborative drawing can occur in many different guises, in the context of this article collaborative drawing refers to adults and children drawing together on the same surface. let’s draw a cat together), but could focus more on finding a way of working through an initial idea to the production of a conclusion. The child and teacher contribute equally to the conceptual goals of the drawing, which might not be a visual representation (i.e. Teachers and children can engage in learning that does not have a predetermined conclusion.
Collaborative drawing does not and should not exclude the child, and, in fact, aims to benefit all drawers equally. If the teacher is involved in part of that process through collaboration, they can be jointly constructing that conceptual goal, obtaining a deep insight into the child’s learning along the way. Deep, meaningful drawing, even if there is a general conceptual goal being aimed for (I want to draw a cat), cannot be planned.
#White india ink drawings series#
More positivist techniques for drawing frequently involve giving students a series of instructional steps that follow a sequence of drawing from the beginning of the work to the end. The purpose of planning for and implementing drawing activities within this context also is chiefly to provide students and teachers with a meaningful context for problem solving through engaging the creative process, since ‘simply providing students with techniques for solving problems can lead to shallow understanding’ (Beghetto & Plucker, 2006, p. not just those who have a ‘talent’ for artmaking.
0 kommentar(er)
