visual culture in art education

1. 36
tn
CurriculumChangeforthe21st
Century:VisualCulture
ArtEducation
KerryFreedman
NorthernlllinoisUniversity
PatriciaStuhr
TheOhioStateUniversitv
CURRICULUMANDVISUALCULTURE
Nationalandinternationalarteducatorshavebegunto moveawayfrom theemphasison tradi-
tionalfine artsdisciplinestowardabroaderrangeof visualartsandculfuralissues(Ballengee-
Morris & Stuhr,2001:Barbosa.1991;Blandy,1994;Congdon,1991;Duncum,1990;Freed-
man, 1994,2000;Garber,1995:Garoian,1999;Hern6ndez,2000;Hicks,1990;Jagodzinski,
1997;Neperud,i995; Smith-Shank,1996:Tavin,2000).Thesecontributorsto thefieldhave
arguedfor a transformationof arteducationin responseto changingconditionsin thecontem-
porary world wherethe visual arts,includin-epopularartsandcontemporaryfine afi, are an
increasinglyimportantpartofthe largervisualculturethatsurroundsandshapesourdailylives.
In theprocessof thistransformation.arteducatorsarereplacingolderviewsof curriculumand
instructionwith anexpandedvision of theplaceof visualartsin humanexperience.
The changein art educationhashistoricalroots.From the beginningof public schoolart
educationin thelate l9th century,a rangeof designformshavebeenincludedin thefield.For
example,earlyarteducationfocusedon industrialdrawingandhandicrafts;children'sinterests
becameatopicofarteducationbythe1920s:artindailyiifewasasloganofthe1930s;dunng
World War II, visualpropagandawastaughtin school;andduringthe 1960s,craftsincreased
in popularity.In the following 2 decades,a few art educatorsaddressedimportantissuesin
theusesof popularcultureandmass-mediatechnologies,contextualizingthesein relationto
students'lives(Chalmers,1981;Grigsby,l9ll;Lanier,1969 1914 McFee& Degge,1977;
Neperud,1973lWilson& Wilson,1977;Wilson,Hurwitz,& Wilson,1987).
Substantialdifferencesexist betweenthoseroots of a generationor more ago and the
contemporarymovement.This is the case.in part, becausethe global virtual culture only
suggestedby theoristsbeforethe availabilityof interactive,personalcomputersin the early
1980shasnowbecomearealitywith itsassociatedproliferationof imagesanddesignedobjects.
The current transformationof art educationis more thanjust a broal:nrng of curriculum
contentandchangesin teachingstrategiesin responseto theimmediacyandmassdistribution
8 1 5

2. 816 FREEDMANANDsTUHR
of imagery.It incluilesa newlevelof theorizingaboutartin educationthatis tiedto emergent
postmodernphilosophiesbasedonthisgrowingenvironmentof intercultural,intraculfural,and
transculturalvisualizations.
Theshiftto visualculturenotonlyrefersto expandingtherangeof visualartsfoms included
in thecurriculumbutalsoto addressingissuesofimageryandartifactsthatdonotcenteronform
per se.This includesissuesconcerningthepowerof representation,the formationof cultural
identities,functionsof creativeproduction,themeaningsof visualnarratives,criticalreflection
ontechnologicalpervasiveness,andtheimportanceofinterdisciplinaryconnections.Thefocus
in recentdecadeson fine artsdisciplinesin U.S. art curriculumandstandardizedtestinghave
resultedin theexclusionof suchcriticalaspectsof visualculturein arteducation.In fact,these
aspectsof the visualartshavebeengivenmore attentionin "nonart" schoolsubjectssuchas
anthropologyandsociologyandfeminist,cultural,andmediastudies(Collins,1989;Mirzoeff,
1998;Scollon& Scollon,1995;Sturken& Cartwright,2001).If the intentionof educationis
to preparestudentsfor personalfulfillment andto constructivelycontributeto society,thenart
educationmust dealwith newly emergingissues,problems,andpossibilitiesthat go beyond
theconstraintsof leamingofferedby a discipline-basedcurriculumandstandardizedformsof
assessment.
The purposeof this chapteris to discussart educationin termsof the broadeningrealm
of visual cultureandto theorizeaboutcuriculum change.The developmentof a conceptual
frameworkfor postmodernvisualcultureis vital to anycontemporaryteachingwith a goalof
critical reflection.Although scholarsin art educationand otherfieldshavebegunto develop
theoreticalunderpinningsfor understandingvisualculture,thetopic from aneducationalper-
spectiveremainsseverelyundertheorized.As aresult,muchtheoreticalwork needsto bedone
in orderto promoteappropriateinterpretationsandapplicationsof visualculturein arteduca-
tion. In this chapter,we havedrawnon scholarshipfrom insideandoutsideof the field to lay
a foundationfor curriculumtheory.In the following main section.we supportthe argument
for broadeningthedomainof arteducationby presentingthevisualartsin theircontemporary,
socioculturalcontext.After discussingthiscontextof visualculture,we addressshiftsin recent
theoryandpracticeof arl educationin the secondmain section.
BROADENINGTHE DOMAINOF ART EDUCATION
A globaltransformationof culturehasoccurredthatis dependentonvisualimagesandartifacts
rangingfrom whatwewearto whatwewatch.Welivein anincreasinglyimage-saturatedworld
where televisionnewsmay control a person'sknowledgeof currentevents,where students
spendmore time in front of a screenthan in front of a teacher,andwhere newbom babiesare
shownvideosto activatestill-developingneurons.Visualcultureis pervasiveandit reflects,as
well asinfluences,generalculturalchange.The pervasivenessof visualculturalforms andthe
freedomwith which theseforms crossvarioustypesof traditionalborderscanbe seenin the
useof fine art iconsrecycledin advertising,computer-generatedcharactersin films, andthe
inclusionof rapvideosin museumexhibitions.Thevisualartsarethemajorpartof this larger
visual culturethat includesfine art, advertising,folk art, televisionand otherperformance
arts,housingandappareldesign,mall andamusementpark design,andotherformsof visual
productionand cotnmunication.Anyone who travels,watchesrock videos,sits on a chair,
entersa building,or surfstheWebexperiencesthevisualarts.Visualcultureis thetotalityof
humanlydesignedimagesandarlifactsthatshapeour existence.
The increasingnumberof visualcultureobjectsandimagesshapesnot only art education
in the 2lst centurybut also the intergraphicaiand intertextualconnectionsbetweenvisual
forms (Freedman,2000,2003).The conceptualandphysicalinteractionsof variousimages
andartif'acts,formsof representation,andtheirmeaningsarefundamentalto theway in which
:;tm

3. 36. CURRICULLTMCHANGEFORTHE2lSTCENTURY817
thevisual artsareinterpretedandunderstood.Art now crossesmany old bordersof culture
andform. For example,advertisingphotography,body fluids, andStarWarsparaphernaliaare
allexhibitedin artmuseums.As a result,knowledgeof whathastraditionallybeenconsidered
f,neart objectsand"good" tastecan no longerbe seenasthe only visual culturalcapitalto
serveelementary,secondary,or higher educationstudents.Fine art is still of greatvaluein
educationand an imporlantpart of historicalandcontemporaryvisual culture;however,the
broader,creative,andcritical explorationof visualculture,andits local, state,national,and
globalmeaningsis a moreappropriatefocusif we wantstudentsto understandtheimportance
of visualculture.
In this sectionof the chapter,we discussfour conditionsof the contemporaryworld that
contextualizeart educationandleadto changesin the productionandstudyof visualculture
by students.First,imporlantcharacteristicsof personalandcommunalidentitiesarediscussed
in termsof representationsconstructedin and throughthe rangeof visual culture.Second,
increasingdaily interactionswith newermedia,particularlyvisualtechnologies,areaddressed
as a major part of contemporaryhuman experience.Third, the permeablequality of disci-
plinary boundariesand the significanceof interdisciplinaryknowledgeto the complexityof
visualculturearediscussed.Fourth,theimportanceof criticalprocessesof interpretationin un-
derstandingthecomplexityof visualcultureis presented.Although,we havedelineatedthese
conditionsinto sectionsfor thischapter,thecontentsofthesesectionsactuallyblur andinteract.
SociallssuesandCulturalldentities
At onetime, sociologiststhoughtpopularformsof visualculturemerelyreflectedsociallife.
Contemporaryimagesand artifacts.however,are a major part of sociallife. Visual culture
teachespeople(evenwhen we arenot consciousof beingeducated)and,in the process,we
recreateourselvesthroughour encounterswith it. As we learn,we change,constructingand
reconstructingourselves.Global culture functionsthroughvisual culture (television,radio,
newspapers,telephones,faxes,World Wide Web,etc.)to producehegemonic,virnralrealities,
includingour socialconsciousnessandidentities.
Theinfluenceof visualcultureon identityoccursonpersonalandcommunallevels.Various
aspectsof personalidentity aremadeup of many culturalbits. Cultureis a collageof many
culturalidentitiesthat areselectedand translatedon a continuingbasis(Clifford, 1988).Far
from beingaunifiedwhole,anyparticularidentityis acombinationof others,with its resulting
contradictionsand incongruities.Theseidentitiesincludeage,gender,and/orsexuality,so-
cioeconomicclass,exceptionality(giftedness,differentlyab1ed,health),geographiclocation,
language,ethnicity,race,religion,andpolitical status.
All we caneverunderstandof a culturalgroupis basedon individual,temporalexperience
aslivedor expressed.Fragmentedknowledgeof identityis all thatcanexist,makingit difficult
to understandevenourown culturesandsocialgroups.However,themorethatis learnedabout
visual culture,ihe betterwe can graspthe conceptof identity; and the more that is leamed
aboutthevariousmembersof aparticulargroup,themorerichly we canunderstandtheirvisual
culture(Stuhr,1999).A recognitionof our own socioculturalidentitiesandbiasesmakesit
easierto understandthemultifacetedidentitiesof others.It alsohelpsusto understandwhy and
how studentsrespondto visualcultureastheydo (Ballengee-Morris& Stuhr,2001;Freedman
& Wood.1999).
Communalidentityis constructedby socialgroupsat the international,national,regional,
stateor province,county,and local community levelswhereinstitutions,laws, andpolicies
interactand change.Thesecommunallevelsare continuallybeing cot,itructedand recon-
structedin accordancewith sociopoliticalpositions.Con.munalidentity is an importantcon-
ceptual site where cultural beliefs and valuesare formed, sanctioned,and/or penalizedas it
mediatestheuncertaintyandconflictof daily life andchange.

4. 818 FREEDMANANDSTUHR
Globalvisualcuhrrreis createdthroughcommodificationanddistributedat aninternational
level.The merchandiseof global visual culturehasexpandedbeyondproductsto ideology,
spirituality,andaesthetics.This merchandizingcanbe a usefultool whencooptedfor positive
educationalpurposes,such as for savingendangeredspecies,protectingthe environment,
or promotinghumanrights; however,it canhavenegativeeffectsaswell when it colonizes,
stereotypes,anddisenfranchises.As aresultofthe expanding,globalinfluenceofvisual culture
in the formationof identity andlived experience,art educationhasa new globalsignificance.
Throughlived experiencewith the increasingrange,availability,and speedof visual forms,
many art educatorshave come to understandthat visual culture is in a continualstateof
becomingandshouldbe taughtassuch.
VisualTechnologies
A cntical issueof visual culture is the place of visual forms producedthrough the use of
computerand otheradvancedtechnologies.Computertechnologyis not only a medium but
alsoa meansthathasenabledpeopleto seethingspreviouslyunimaginedandto crossborders
of form from the flne artsto the massmediato scientificvisualization.Visual technologies
allow peopleto create.copy,project,manipulate,erase,andduplicateimageswith aneaseand
speedthatchallengesdistinctionsof talent,technique,andtheconceptuallocationof form. It
couldbe arguedthatmany of the issuesthat areseenascritical to postmodernvisualculture
haveexistedhistoricallyin otherforms;however,theglobaltechnologicalpresenceof images
and objects,the easeand speedwith which they can be producedand reproduced,and the
powerof theirpervasivenessdemandseriousattentionin education'
Contemporaryvisualtechnologieshavepromotedthe collapseof boundariesbetweened-
ucationandentertainment.Advertisements,Web sites,andeventhenews,combineeducation
and entertainmentto promote the saleif products and/or ideas.Consumersare approached
asaudiencesthroughthe instantaneoustransmissionof soundandimageryto eventhe most
remoteareas.Goodsandideasarepitchedunderthe guiseof enjoyableandaddictingenter-
tainment.This edu-tainmenthasfictionalqualitiesthathavebecomeanimportantpartof daily
reality andthe sensualqualitiesof the imageryareasseductiveasthey aredidactic.It is the
wide distributionof this interactionof seduction,information,andrepresentationthatmakes
newervisualtechnologiessopowerful.
Although experienceswith visual technologieswere once consideredan escapeinto a
fictional, virtual world, studentsusing technologytoday are understoodas engagingwith
complex,global communitiesat multiple cognitivelevels.We now experiencetechnology
as reality and appropriatevisual cultureas life experience,turning it into attitudes,actions,
andevenconsclousness(Rushkoff,1994).While we arebeingshapedby technologicalvisual
culture,we shapeit throughour fashion,toy,music,andotherpreferences.Corporationsand
advertisingagenciesvideotapestudentsin teenculturefocus groups,who act asinformants
on the next"hot" or "cool" thing, which arethendevelopedinto products.The productsare
subsequentlyadvertisedand sold inside,aswell asoutside,of schoolto their peersthough
global visualtechnologies.The processillustratesoneof the partsvisual technologiesplays
in the fusionof educationandentertainmentaswell asin thecollapseof boundariesbetween
studentcultureandcorporateinterests.
Visual cultureforms are merging.Rarely do contemporaryartistsspecializein painting
on canvasor sculptingin marblelpaintersdo performanceart; actorsdo rock videos;video
artistsrecyclefilm clips; filmmakersusecomputergraphics,which areadaptedfor toys and
T-shirt advertising;and advertisersappropriatepaintings.Today's visual arts have moved
beyondpainting and sculptureto include computergraphics,fashion design,architecture'
environmentaldesign,television,comicsandcartoons,magazineadvertisements,andso on'

5. 36. CURzuCULLMCHANGEFORTHE21STCENTTIRY 819
Visualculturealsooverlapswith artsnotusualiycategorizedasvisual,suchasdanceandtheater.
Performanceartistsof manytypesusecornputerizedlighting andsoundto createatmospheric
anddramaticeffects.The performingartsarepartof visualculture.Evenmusichasbecome
morevisual throughthe increaseduseof rock videosandcomplextechnologicallyproduced
light showsduring concerts.Throughthe useof technology,suchascomputergraphicsand
audio software,art objectshaveincreasinglybecomerecycledbits of otherobjectsthat are
collaged,reconstructed,andreproduced.
In the processof changingthe visual arts,advancedtechnologieshavechangedwhat it
meansto beeducatedin thearts.In thecontextofpostindustrializedculture,thevisualartscan
no longerbe seenasisolatedfrom generalculture,theproductsof a few alienated,individual
artistsworking in a smallfine art communityof museums,collectors,andgalleries.Museum
or gallery exhibitioncontactwith original fine art objectsis now only oneof manypossible
experienceswith the visual arts.Newertechnologieshaveenabledencounterswith thevisual
artsto becomeembeddedin all aspectsof our daily iives.
PermeableArenas of Knowledge
It is becomingmore difficuit to distinguishthe fine arts from other aspectsof visual cul-
turebecausethe qualitativedifferencesamongtheseforms havebecomelessdiscrete.Visual
culture is a mode of experiencethat connectspeoplethroughmany and varied mediators.
The variety and complexity of the experienceare dependenton the possibility of a range
of quaLitl,relatedto form, noneof which shouidbe inherentlyexcludedfrom the investiga-
tion, analysis,and critique enabledby aft education.Even conceptsand objectspreviously
consideredfairly stable are in flux. Truth has sh,rftedfrom an epistemologicalto an on-
tological issue:That is, it becomesiess about what we know than who we are.Time has
lost its neatlinearity,spaceappearsto expandandcontract,andboundariesof varioussorts
havebecomeblurred.Perhapsmostimportant,postmodernvisualculturemakesimperativea
connectednessthat underminesknowledgeas traditionallytaughtin school.It involvesin-
teractionsamongpeople,cuitures,forms of representation,andprofessionaldisciplines.As
suggestedearlier,this condition has beenparticularlypromotedthrough the use of visual
technologies.
In light of thesecontemporaryconditions,it seemslessimportantthanit oncewasto focus
determinationsof eitherworthinessof studyor qualityof objectin educationon distinctionsof
tasteor between"high" and"low" arts.Suchdistinctionsmay be importantto understanding
someaspectsof artisticpractice,suchasprivatecollecting,museumexhibition,andtheuseof
fineartin advertising.Thesedistinctionsofvisual form havelongbeenbasedon socioeconomic
differencesandarethereforecontral)' to the democraticpurposesof schooling' Although such
distinctionsmight be understandableas boundariesof professionaltraining in a period of
increasingspecialization,we now live in a time thatincludesimportantchallengesto extreme
specialization.Suchchallengesaremadeby evenhighly specializedprofessionalswho realize
that solving the most seriousandimportantproblemsof the world demandinterdisciplinary
andcross-disciplinaryknowledge.
The realm of the visual artsinherentlyoverlapswith otherdisciplinarydomains.Artists
andotherculturalproducersdrawon all typesofknowledgeandcognitiveprocessesto create.
Recentresearchon cognition,andevenpredictionsby iaborleaders,suggeststhatlearningin
thefuturewill havemoreto dowith developingarangeof knowledgethatinvolvesdisciplinary'
interdisciplinary,andinterpersonalrelationshipsthanwith theboundariesof professionaldis-
ciplines(Solso,1997).Connectingcontenttypically consideredPartcfother schoolsubjects
irrthe curriculumhelpssfudentsto understandtheimportanceandpowerof the visualculture
andtheir placein the world.

6. 820 FREEDMANAND STUHR
Processesof Un,:lerstandingComplexity
As a pafi of the processof conceptformationin education,the artshaveoftenbeendichoto-
mously categorized,inhibiting understandingandreducingthe complexityof visual culture.
The processof learningnew conceptsdoesinvolvedichotomousdistinctions.For example,
childrenwith petsmaybeginto learnthata cow is a cow by learningthatis not a dogor a cat;
theylearnto discernonestyleof paintingby learningitsdifferencesfrom otherstyles(Gardner,
1972).However,if attemptsto understandvisual culture are successful,the dichotomiesof
early conceptformationareovercome,the complexityof conceptsbecomesincreasinglyap-
parent,categoriesblur, and hard and fast distinctionsbecomelessdiscrete.At this level of
understanding,oppositionsbecomedualisms("two sidesof thesamecoin"),multipleperspec-
tivesarevalued,andoversimplifications(suchasstereotypes)arereplacedby more complex
representations.
Contemporaryvisual cultureis too complexto be representedin a dichotomousfashion.
The complexitiesareillustratedby practicessuchasimagerecycling,thedifficultiesof defin-
ing creativityasoriginality,andthe effectsof maintainingconceptualoppositions(including
distinctionssuchasfinevs.populararlsandmalevs.femalecapabilities).As discussedearlier,
it is not easyto view culturesor their creationsas totally separatebecausethey interacton
many levels andthrough many media.Fine artistsborrow imagery from popular culture, men
borrow from women,andartistsin onecountryborrow from thosein othercountries.These
intersectionsarerevealedandsupportedin andthroughvisualculturalforms.
An increasingbody of contemporarytheoryand artisticpracticerepresentsthe seductive
infusionof meaningin aestheticsasthepowerof visualculture(e.g.,Ewen, 1988;Shusterman,
1989).The integralrelationshipbetweendeepmeaningand surfacequalitiesis one of the
reasonsthat visual culture is so complex.It is not the surfacequalitiesof form that make
art worth teachingin academicinstitutions;rather,it is the profoundand complexqualities,
basedon their socialandculturalcontextsandmeanings,that areattachedto forms. In part'
postmodernvisual culture producersof varioustypesreflect and enablethis refocusingof
aesthetictheory.They oftenrejectformalisticusesof theelementsandprinciplesof designin
favorof symbolicusesthatsuggestmultiple andextendedsocialmeanings.
Making meaningfrom complexvisualculturalforms occursthroughat leastthreeoverlap-
ping methods:(a) cornmunication,(b) suggestiort,and (c) appropriation(Freedman,2003)'
Communicationinvolvesa fairly direct line of thoughtbetweenthe maker and the viewer'
The makerhasa messagethatsheor he intendsfor viewersto understand,andthemessageis
conveyedin asdirectamanneraspossibleto anintendedandunderstoodaudience.Suggestion
involvesaprocessby which associationis stirnulatedin viewersby amaker(whetherintended
or not), resultingin the extensionof meaningbeyondthe work. Appropriationinvolvesthe
creativeinterpretationby a viewerwho encountersa visualcultureform in which the maker
hasintentionallydiffusedmeaning.In a sense,viewerscornpleteany work of art by drawing
on theirprior knowledgeandexperiencesastheyconstructmeaning.However,contemporary
visualcultureis oftencomplexbecausepostmodemartistsdeliberatelyconfoundtheconstruc-
tion of meaning.Theseconditionsillustratethe importanceof teachingvisual culture asa
processof creativeandcriticalinquiry.
NEW APPROACHES TO ART EDUCATION:
VISUALCULTUREINQUIRY
In part,visualcultureinquiry challengestraditionalforms of art educationbecauseit is sen-
sitiveto the socialand cultural issuesdiscussedin the previoussection.The foundationof
art educationconceptualizedasvisual cultureinquiry is a matterof teachingfor life in and

7. 36. CURRICULUMCHANGEFORTHE2ISTCENTURY821
throughthe visual arIs.It helpsstudentsto recognizeand understandthe ambiguities,con-
Tlicts,nuances,andephemeralquaiitiesof socialexperience,muchof whichis nowconfigured
throughimageryanddesignedobjects.
In part,freedomin contemporarydemocraciesis reflectedthroughthewaysin whichvisual
realitiesareconstructed,cuttingacrosstraditionalartisticandsocialboundaries.Studentsand
teachersare becomingawareof the power of visual culture in the formation of attitudes,
beliefs.and actions.ln dynamicways, visual cultureshapesthe ways we look at ourselves
and perceiveothers,often portraying individuals and groupsin ways contradictoryto the
democraticpurposesof schooling.At thesametime,educationis oneof thelastpublicforums
for apotentiallyfreecritiqueof theproductsof massdistnbutedvisualtechnologiesthatmake
up the mediaandvisualcultureandfor thoughtfulstudentreflectionon their own production
andusesof visual culture.The critical necessityof teachingvisual culturein this contextis
seenin thelack of seriousdebateevenin the "free" mediaasit becomesincreasinglyfocused
on entertainment(e.g.,Aronowitz, 1994;Morley,1992).
Perhapsthepeoplemostinfluencedby visualculturearechildrenandadolescents.Students
incorporatethesocialcodes,language,andvaluesofvisual cultureintotheirlives(Freedman&
Wood,1999;Tavin,2001).Visualcultureinfluencesstudents'knowledge,affectstheiridentity
construction,andshapestheir aestheticsensibilities.
In thefollowing sections,we flrstarguetheimportanceof movingfrom a schoolfoundation
of modernistaestheticpolicy basedon industrialtrainingto a more meaningfulandrelevant
art education.Second,we discussproblemsof atomizingvisualculturein curriculum.Third,
we focuson teachingasa processof helping individualsandlearningcommunitiesto make
meaningthroughthefusionof creativeandcritical inquiry.
ReconceptualizingModernistAestheticPolicy:ArtEducation
Respondsto IndustrialTraining
An uns.tatedaestheticpolicy hasdevelopedthroughtheeducationalapplicationof anaesthetic
canonthatunderliesall of whatwe do.As policy,thecanonhascalcifiedandreproduceditself,
throughcentury-longpracticesof schooling.Like anyeducationalpolicy,this aestheticpolicy
impliesa socialcontractthatis revealedthroughthemodernist,industrialcuniculum andstan-
dardizedteststakenby studentsandteachers.It is a historicalartifactthatwasimportantin its
time for thedevelopmentof thevisualartsin theUnitedStatesand,in public schoolarteduca-
tion,hasbeenbasedonindustrialdesignatleastsinceWalterSmith'swork in the 1870s.Times
havechanged,however,andthecontractis beingrenegotiated.Thenewperspectiveofart edu-
cationrespondsto contemporarychangein what studentsneedto know in andthroughthe arts.
The industrialtrainingmodelof educationcarrieswith it regimented,mechanistictraining
andthe reproductionof traditional forms of knowledgethrough group conformity. As a result,
studentsworking within this model oftenmakearl thatlooks very much alike.Theseassembly-
line-lookingproducts,suchascolorwheels,areproducedby roteandrepeatedin multiplegrade
levels.Theemphasisonthismodelhasenabledthedevelopmentof theschoolartstyle(Efland,
1916, 1983)and has crampedteacherand studentfreedom in the exploration of conceptual
complexityin both makingandviewing.Of course,sometechnicalexercisesareimportantto
art education,but to emphasizethis modelof instructionconfoundstheimportanceof art.
Like otherschoolsubjects,art educationadoptedindustrialtraining asits basicapproach
in the late 19thcentury.Today,the businesscommunity haschangedfrom a focus on modem,
industrialproductiontechniquesto postmodernmarket information and services,in which
homeloansandvacationscanbeboughton theWeb,childrenlearnaboutouterri)acethrough
role-playcomputergames,andpeopleaccessmapsthroughsatelliteconnectionsin theircars.
As discussedearlier,the history of art educationis repletewith examplesof the inclusion

8. 822 F'REEDMANAND STUHR
of popular culture lrnagesand objects.The currentmovementleavesbehind the technical
emphasisof industrialtrainingthat alienatesproducersfrom the largermeaningsassociated
with theirproduction.Insteadit givesattentionto themultiple connectionsbetweenform and
meanlng.
The industrialmodelin art educationis basedon analyticalaesthetics.This aestheticper-
spectivehasbeentreatedin curriculumasifit is objective:Thatis, analyticalaestheticsis not
generallytaughtasif it werea sociallyconstructedandculturallylocatedphilosophicalstance.
In curiculum, theanalyticemphasisis formalism.Formalismis apseudoscientificconception
of aestheticsthatdevelopedin thelate 19thandearly20th centuryat a time whensciencewas
gainingcurrencyin applicationto all areasof sociallife. Otherconceptionsof aestheticsexist
but havelargelybeenignoredasphilosophicalanalysisin art education.
Even when the focus of instructionis not formal per se (that is, when formal qualities
are understoodas supportsfor ideas)the educationalpresentationof formal qualitiesis not
alwaysresponsiveto social and cultural issues.Considerthe exampleof frontal views of
authorityfigures,which is often includedaspart of the aestheticcanonstudentsmust learn.
Not only is this conceptrelativelytrivial in the big pictureof the small amountof time we
haveto teachstudents,but alsoit is Eurocentric.In certainAfncan cultures,authorityhasbeen
representedtraditionallyin femalerelief form in which its femaleness(protrudingbreastsand
buttocks)is intendedto be viewedfrom the side.Another instancewheretheWesterncanon
of pictorial frontal views of authoritydoesnot hold up is in the contextof traditionalPlains
NativeAmericanshieldsandteepeeswhereauthorityf,guresarerepresentedaspartof symbolic
narratives.Theirauthoritymightberecognizedby headgear,size,andsoon.Evenin European
art,theauthorityof malefigureshasbeensymbolicallyshownby uniforms,weapons,andeven
by connectionto a spouseasin a pair of profile portraits.Theseexamplesillustratethat the
focusof curriculummustchangeif studentsareto developanunderstandingof thecomplexity
of thoughtconcerningvisualimageryandartifacts.
The traditionalfocuson historical,flne art exemplarshastendedto suggesta singleline of
Westernstylisticdevelopment.Formaland technicalqualitieshavebeenrepresentedin cur-
riculum asthemostimportantconnectionbetweenartobjects.Eventheeducationalemphasis
of content,suchasthe figure,landscape,or still life, hasoftenbecomeformal andtechnical
whenteachersassignstudentsto "makea VanGoghsunflowerpainting"with paperplatesand
dry markers.In the past,the rich conceptualconnectionsamongimages,objects,and other
forms of culture,which areoftentheirreasonsfor being,havebeenmissedor hiddenin such
endeavors.The complex,interdisciplinaryreasonswe valuesuchartists'ideasareneglected.
Undertheseconditions,visualcultureobjectsaretransformedthrougheducation,oftenlosing
importantattachedculturalmeanings.
CurriculumasProcess:ChallengingAtomisticContent
andAssessment
Recently,generalcurriculumtheoristshavebeenstrugglingwith theprojectof reconceptual-
izing curiculum from postmodernperspectives(Giroux, 1992;Pinar,1988;Pinar,Reynolds,
Slattery,& Taubman,1996).Thisprojectis a responseto themanysocialandculturalchanges
that are now influencingstudents'lives.The projectof developingappropriateeducational
responsesto suchchangeis increasinglyimportantassocietiesandculturesleavethe secure
thinking of modernisticforms of education,whereknowledgeandinquiry methodsarerep-
resentedas stableand curriculum is intendedto be reproductive.For example,postmodem
curiculum theoristspoint out thatcurriculumis not a neutralenterprise;it is a matterof se-
lection.As a result,curriculumcontainsand reflectsthe interestsof individualsand social

9. 36. CURRICULUX4CHANGEFORTTIE2lSTCENTURY823
groups.PatrickSlattery(1995)hasarguedthatcurriculumexpressesautobiographybecause
it is createdby humanbeingswho leavepartsof themseh'esin their teachingand writing.
He has suggestedthat curriculum shouldfocuson issuesof the self, becausethat is where
learningtakesplace,and he arguesthat educatorscan usethe conceptof autobiographyto
betterunderstandeducationalconditions.A postmodernunderstandingof the personaland
socialprocessesof curriculumplanningandenactmentexemplifiesthe aestheticcharacterof
educationandtheimportanceof consideringindividuallearningin relationto socialcontexts.
The modernistproblemof curriculummay be thoughtof ashavin-qalloweda veil to fall
over suchsocialissues,hidrng or obscuringthem.Thrs veil hascoveredthe complexityand
connectionsof artisticrelationshipsasmodernistcurriculuurhassoughtto continuallybreak
downknowledgeintominutebits of infomation. As thecurriculumhasbecomemorefocused
on smallobjectivesandtraditional,fineartexemplarsareusedoverandoveragain,arthasbeen
transformedfrom visualexpressionsof multiple andcomplexideasto oversimplifiedusesof
formal andtechnicalqualities.
The postmodernproblemof curriculumis to lift the veil andthusmakearteducationmore
meaningfulthanmeresensoryexperience.Thiscouldbeaccomplishedby challengingstudents
with inquiry basedon creativeproductionandcriticalreflectioninvolvingdeepinterrogations
of images,artifacts,andideasthat approachthecompiexityof visualcultureasexperienced.
This oftenrequiressomeschoolsubjectintegration.
The major issueof curriculumintegrationnow can no longerbe whetherto integrate,but
ratherwhat, when, and how to teachstudentsmost eft-ectivelythrough the constructionof
integratedknowledge.Schoolsareadoptingintegratedapproachesto curriculumin an effort
to teachstudentsthe conceptualconnectionsthey needto succeedin contemporarylife. Art
educationshouldhelp studentsknow the visual artsin their integrity and complexity,their
conflictingideasaswell astheir acceptedobjects,andtheir connectionsto socialthoughtas
well astheir connectionsto otherprofessionalpractices.
As discussedearlier.confiningthevisualartsto narrowlearningobjectivesandassessment
strategiesbasedontraditionalnotionsof excellencein fineartdisciplinesis highlyproblematic.
The old constructsof knowledgeaboutthe visualartshaveincludedat leastoneothersetof
boundariesthathasresultedin difficultiesfor anarteducation.lt involvesthequestion:Where
do theboundariesof art stopandotherschooisubjectsbegin?Reproducingnalrowconstructs
of knowledgeshouldnot be the purposeof contemporaryart education.Not only is finding
a perimeterfor the open conceptof art difficult. but also it may be an ineffectiveway to
approachcurriculum.From a contemporaryeducationalstandpoint,our goal is to make as
manyconnectionsaspossibiebecauseconnectionsproduceintegratedlearning.
In orderto reconceptualizecurriculumin this way,it is necessaryto understandcurriculum
asa processratherthanasa singletext.The processof curriculumis its product.Curriculum
is not a unifiedwhole. It is a collageof bits of informationbasedon knowledge(Freedman,
2000,2003).It is flexible,atsornetimessequentialandatothertimeshighly interactive,making
connectionsnot only to thepreviouslessonbut alsoto life experiences.
An integralrelationshipexistsbetweenassessmentandcurriculum.Both mustbeof quaiity
in orderto havea successfulprogram.An authenticperspectiveof assessmentandcurriculum
is to developboth throughcommunitydiscourse.Criteriafor assessmentmustbe developed
throughcommunitydebate,but not allowedto be trivializedthroughexcessivefragmentation
andoverassessment(Boughton,1991,1997').
Art educationis no different in the dissolutionof its boundariesfrom other areasand
disciplines.Postmodernismand advancesin computerandmediatechnologieshaveenabled
boundaryerosionthat has promptednew ways of conceptualizimgsubjectareasand what
constitutesimportantdrsciplinaryknowledge.As a result,new methodsfor investigationand

10. 824 FREEDMANANDsTUHR
datacollection elr-continually being inventedand developed.The arts figure prominently in
thesenew methodologicalconfigurations(Barone& Eisner,1997;Gaines& Renow,1999:
Prosser,1998;Rose,2001).
ArtisticProduction:MakingMeaningThroughCreative
andCriticalInquiry
In thepast,thefocuson formal andtechnicalattributesof productionhaslimited our conception
of curriculumandhasbeenconstrainedby atleastfour interconnecting,historicalfoundations.
First, therehas beena focus on realisticrepresentationas a major criterion for quality in
student art. Teachersoften cite parent and administrative pressurefor this focus. A focus
on realism,withoutconceptualfoundation,addressesonly oneform of artisticproductionand
ignorestheimportanceof abstractandsymbolicrepresentationsof ideasthatarevital to human
experience.Creativeandcriticalprobleminvestigationandproductionbasedon variousforms
of abstraction,fantasy,science-fiction,andsoon canonly be promotedthroughopen-ended,
independentinquiry leadingto connectiveformsof representation.
Second,in conflictwith the focuson realism,but coexistingwith it is anemphasison ex-
pressionisticcharacteristicsandmaintainingchildlikequalitiesin studentart.Thishasresulted
in productsthathaveformal andtechnicalqualitiesthatlook somewhatlike youngchildren's
art regardlessof the conceptualsophisticationof the student.The painterlyquality of child
art is valuedasevidenceofindividual self-expression(in part,basedon fineart stylessuchas
abstractexpressionism)andis a foundationof theaestheticof latemodernism.However,these
expressionisticqualitiesarenot necessarilyevidenceof individualitybecausetheyhavebeen
sociallyconstructedandhavebecomea criterionfor groupassessment.
Third, asdiscussedearlier,the industrialtrainingmodel hasled to a focuson formal and
technicalqualities,but theseare alsoeasyto teachand assess.Curriculum contentis often
selectedand configuredto be efficiently handledin the instirutionalizedsettingsof class-
rooms.With theemphasison standardizedcurriculumandtesting,the relianceon simplistic,
easily observedproductsor resultsand proceduresis convenient.Although thesepractices
often trivialize art andaregenerallyirrelevantto students'lives, they areconsideredefficient
andeffectiveby administrativeandgoverningbodies,andteachershavebeenencouragedto
perpetuatethesepractices.
Fourth, art teachersareforced to competefor funds andadvocatefor programsthroughart
exhibitions for parentsand administratorswho are not well educatedin the arts.As a result,
teachersareoftenplacedin a positionof defendingtheir placein theschoolcommunitybased
on the successof exhibitions,which dependon a studentart aestheticthat demonstratesa
high degreeof formal and technicalskrll, but is not intellectuallydemanding.Ratherthan
acknowledgingthatartinvolvesarangeof life issues,abilities,andconcepts,artteachershave
beenpressuredto think thattheir worth is basedon students'technicalproductionskills and
knowledgeof a few art historical facts.
Thenewconceptionof curriculumandstudentartisticinquiryopensup thepossibilityof
moving awayfrom theseproblems.A curriculumbasedon visual culturetakesinto consid-
erationstudents'daily,postmodernexperiencesandtheir futurelives.Most studentswill not
be professionalartists,but all studentsneedto becomeresponsiblecitizensof the world. In
a democracy,an aim of educationis to promotethe developmentof responsiblecitizenswho
think cntically, act constructivelyin an informed manner.and collaboratein the conscious
formation of personaland communal identities.ln order for art curriculum to fulfill this aim
in the contemporarycontext,students'studioexperiencemustbe thoughtof aspart of visual
cultureandasa vital way to cometo understandthe visualmrlieuin which thevlive. Student

11. 36, CURRICULUMCHANGEFORTHE21STCENTURY 825
studioexperienceis essentialto teachingand learningaboutvisual culturebecauseit (a) is
a processof creative/criticalinquiry, (b) helpsstudentsunderstandthecomplexitiesof visual
culture,and(c) connectsandempowerspeople.
Artistic Production ls a Process of Creative/Critical inquiry
Creativeproductionandcritical reflectionarenot separatein art;theyaredualisticandmutu-
ally dependent.Creativeproductionis inherentlycritical,andcritical reflectionis inherently
creative.Whenwe look atanimageor artifact,wecreateit in thesensethatwe giveit meaning.
It is importantto conceptualizetheseprocessesasbeing interconnectedif art educatorsare
going to teachin waysappropriateto understandingvisualculture.
Many differenttypesof studios(i.e.,commercialarts,finearts,computergraphics,videoand
film production)andstudiopracticesexist.Studiopracticesincludeconcepfualizing,viewing,
analyzing,judging, designing,constructing,andmarketingvisualforms.An importantparrof
studiopracticeis participationin thediscoursesof variouscommunities(professional,student,
ethnic,gender,environmental,etc.) to developcontextsthrough which connectionscan be
madebetweenproductionand sociallife. As discussedearlier,a critical aspectof teaching
visual culture is making connectionsand crossingborders.This is accomplishedthrough
conceptuallygroundedprocessesof creative/criticalinquiry that promotesynthesis,extend
knowledge,andenrichrelationships.Thesearethepowersof theartsandvital aspectsof studio
production.Conceptuallygroundedproductionprocessescrossovertraditionalboundariesof
form, breakingdown old bordersof media-drivencurriculum, andturning curriculum upside-
down,sothatthedevelopmentofideasaregivenattentionfirstandthetechniquesandprocesses
emergeasthe expressionof thoseideas.In this way,techniqueandmediaarerelatedto and
enhancethe making of meaningin creative/criticalinquiry. Visual culture is an expressionof
ideasthroughthe useof technicalandformal processes,but theseprocessesarenot the main
purposeof artisticproduction.
Creative/criticalinquiry is not only for secondarylevel students;in fact, it shouldbegin
at the elementarylevel. Young studentsare alreadyadoptingpostmodernvisual culture as
a frameworkfor understandingreality outsideof school.For instance,elementarystudents
analyze,role-play,draw,andconstructenvironmentsbasedon the Harry Potterbooks,films,
and toys from interdisciplinaryperspectivesof casting,acting,designing,costumestyling,
narration,andmechanization.
MakingVisualCultureCanHelpStudentsGrasp
Complexitiesof Culture
Traditionally, aft hasbeenrepresentedin educationasinherentlygood.Thetermarr hascarried
with it assumptionsof quality,value,andenrichment.However,thevisualartsarenotinherentl-v
good.The greatpowerof thevisualartsis theirability to havea varietyof effectson our lives;
but thatpowercanmakethemmanipulative,colonizing, anddisenfranchising.The complexity
of thispowerneedsto beconsideredaspartof educationalexperience.Forexample,advertising
imagesareproducedby artistsand arethought of asgood for the companieswhoseproducts
they areintendedto sell,but,theyoftenrepresentstereotypesandculturalbiasesthatdamage
viewers' self-concepts.Another exampleis the astronomicalamountof money paid to sports
starsandforhistoricalfineart,which seemsinconsistentwith theidealsof moralresponsibility.
As aresultof suchcomplexities,investigationsof issuesof emporve:-:nent,representation,and
socialconsciousnessarebecomingmoreimportantin arteducation.

12. 826 FREEDMANAND STUHR
Cultural Productioi; Connects and Empowers People
Visual cultureconnectsmakersto viewersthroughcommunication,identity formation,and
culturalmediation.Addressingaspectsof visualcommunication,identityformation,andcul-
turalmediationhasbecomea vital issuein arteducation(e.g.,Ballengee-Morris,& Striedieck,
1997;Freedman,1994;Stuhr, 1995).Studioproductioncan aid studentsto understandthat
visualcultureinvolvespersonalandcommunalcodesof symbols,images,environments,arti-
facts,and soon. Investigatingthe relationshipbetweenmakersandviewersof visualculture
can help them to identify and recognizeethnocentricperspectivesat the national,regional,
state,andlocal levels.This processis importantbecauseit createspossibilitiesfor thecritique
of visual cultureat all levelsto achievedemocraticeducationalgoalsintendedto guidethe
preparationof reflectiveandresponsiblecitizens,consequentlyleadingto a moresociallycon-
sciousandequitablesociety.From a visualcultureperspective,productionempowersmakers
andviewersby promotingcritiquethroughthe processof making,encouraginganalysisdur-
ing viewing, and enablingmakersand viewersto claim ownershipof imagesand designed
objects.
CONCLUSION
Art educationbasedonteachingvisualculturerequiresnewcurriculumandinstructionalroles,
content,andstrategiesto shift the focus of the field fiom nanow, conventionalapproachesto
openprocessesofcreativeandcritical inquiry.A newlanguageis necessaryfor arteducation
thatdoesnotsolelydependonfineartsdiscourse.Ideally,it shouldinvolvediscoursesonall the
visualarts,suchasmediastudies,designeducation,culturalcritique,andvisualanthropology.
Art teachersshouldbe educatedto becomeinvolvedcitizensin the variouscommunitiesin
which they live and work. They should strive to enrich the communities to createpride in
cultural heritageandaddresscontemporaryproblemsthrough artistic solutions.Art shouldbe
approachedasanequallylegitimateschoolsubjectandconceptuallyintegratedwith therestof
theschoolcurriculum.All educatorsshouldteachtheconceptsandskillsnecessaryto function
effectivelyin a democraticsocietynow andin thefuture.
New instructionalstrategiesincludeteachersbecomingrole modelsof leadershipin their
professionalcommunity.Toconceptualizearteducationasdifferentfrom otherschoolsubjects
inadvertentlydisengagesit from the legitimateschool curriculum. In the larger sense,art
teachersfocuson what otherteachersconsiderimportant:the conceptsand skills necessary
to function effectively in a democraticsocietynow andin the future. But, art teachersdo this
throughvisualculture,which is asprofoundin its effectaswrittentexts.
Teachereducationprogramsneedto prepareteachersto actasfacilitatorsof studentcreative
andcritical inquiry.As partof teachingvisualculture,we mustshifi from a focuson didactic
instructionto an educaiionthat promotesstudentresponsibility.When studentsareallowed
to investigatethe rangeof visual culture with the guidanceof a teacher,they can acdvely
discovercomplexmeanings,multiple connections,andenrichedpossibilitiesfor creationand
critique.Art classroomsshouldbe conceptualizedasmultitaskingarenaswhereimagesand
objectscrossover andareproducedanddiscussedto lead studentsand teachersthroughthe
investigationof ideas,issues,opinions,andconflicts.
Throughtechnologicaladvancements.visualcultureisbecomingincreasinglypervasiveand
affectingthe lives of studentsand teachersworldwide.The professionalfield mustrespond
to the challengeof this significantsocialchangeby educatingnewart teachersandretrarntng
current art teachersto usetechnologyto createstudentswho areawareofthe world they live
in andto takean activeresponsiblerole in improvinglife for all.

13. 36, CURRICULUMCHANGEFORTHE2ISTCENTURY827
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The authorswish to thankRon Neperudfor his carefulreadingandthoughtfulcommentson
this chaoter.
REFERENCES
Aronorvitz.S. (199;l).Tcchnolog,v-andthe luture of rvork.In G. Bender& T. Druckley (Eds.).Crllure on tlrc brink:
Ideaologiesof tethnologt (pp. l 5-301.Seattle:Bay Press.
Ballengce-Mitrris.C. B.,& Striedieck.L M. ( 1997).A postrnodemfeministperspectiveonvisualartandvisualcuiture
in elementaryteachereducation.In D. R. Walling {Ed.). Llnder C(tnslruL:irtn;Th?n,le L'f'theurt antl visuttlt ulture
ttndhunrtttritiesin postnndemst-hooling(pp. 193-215.)Indianapolis:Phi DeltaKappa.
Ballengce-Moris.C.. & Stuhr.P L. (2001).Multiculturalartandvisualculturaleducationin a chatrsinsworld.Arr
Educatiot. 54(,+).6 13.
Barbosa,A. M. (1991).Art educationandenvironment.Jountalof Multiculturulund CrossCulluralReseurtltlnArt
EdLtcatirut.9(I ). 59-6,1.
Baronc,T.. & Eisner,E. (1991).Anotherexampleof arts-bascdresearch.Contplententan'Methtils.fbr lleseartlt in
Edw utiut. Washington,DCI:AntcricanEducatitlnalRcscarchAssociation.
Blandy. D. (199.1).Assuming responsibility:Disability rights and thc pfeparatiotrol art educators.Struliesin Art
Edut'utiort.-t.5(3) I79 187.
Bgughton,D. (1994).Evuluatiortruttlassessrnentin t'isuuldrts(duLutiul.Geelong,VIC: DcakinUniversity.
Ilouglrton,l). ( 1997).Reconsideringissuesof asscssmentantlachievetnentstandardsin arl sducatioll.Studicsin Art
Education.-16(.1).199 2l-1.
Chalmers.F.G. ( l gUl ). Art educationascthnology.Studiesin Art Educatiort.22(3).6 l 4
Clilf ord, J. ( lgull). Thepredicarnentt,f culture:Ttt'entieth-t'enturtellmogrupht,lileralurc,nnrl arl. Carnbridgc.MA:
FlarvardUnivcrsityPrcss.
Collins.J. (1989).IJnconntuttrtultures: Ptryulortullure urulposl nuxlentisnt.New York: Routlcdge.
Congdon.K. G. (1991).A fblk artibcus.Journalo.l'MultiutlturalanLlCrcss'tulturulResean-hin Art Educutittt,9.
65 72.
I)uncurn.P ( 1990).Clcaringthc dccksf'ordorninantculturc:Somelirst principleslbr a contcmporaryart cducatlon.
Studiesiil Art Educatitnt:A Jttunrul tt.fIssuesandResean'h'-l/('1).207-215
Elland.A. (1976).'fhcschoolartstyle:A lunctionalanalvsis.Stutlie.sirtArt Edrcttlirtrt,17.37 !4.
Efland.A. ( 198.1).Schoolartanditssocialorigins Studie:in Art l:duttttiot,21.19 57
Ewen.S. (l9Utt).A/1r'tnswninginn.qes:The ytliticsof s^le in totilenryxtrantultLtre.New York:BasicBooks.
Freedrnan.K.(1994).Interpretinggenderandvisualcultureinartclassrootns.StudiesinArtEducolirn,.i-5(3).l-57
170.
Freednian.K. ( 1995).Educationalchangcwithinstructuresol history.culture.anddiscourse.In R. W. Neperud(Ed.).
Conte.ril.((nleill, and tomntrutilt in art educalion.Ncw York:TeachcrsColiegePrcss.
Frccdman.K (2(n0).Socialpcrspcctiveson an cducationin thcU.S.:Teachingvisualculturcin a dcmocracy.Stadies
in Art Education.11(1).311379.
Freedman.K. (2003).Tenchingvisttttltulture. New York: TeachcrsCollegePrcss.
Frecdman.K.. & Wood.J. (1999).Studentknowledgeol'visualculture:Imagesinsideandoutsideol school.Studies
in Art Edttcation,2(10). 128-112.
Garber.E. (1995).Tcachingar1in rhccontextofculture:A studvin theborderlands.Slrrdiesin ArtEducation,36(4|,.
218-232.
Gardner.H. (1912).The developmentof sensitivit),to ligurai and stylisticaspectsof paintings.BritishJournal of
Pstclutlogt,6J. 605-6 I 5.
Gaines.J.M..&Renow.M.(Eds.).(1999).Collectittgvisibleet,idente.Minneapolis.MN:UniversityofMintiesota
Press.
Garoian.C.(1999).Perfitrningpedagttgt:Tt*+ardanarto;fpolitics.Albany:SUNYPrcss,
Giroux.H. (1992).Bordercros.sings:CulturalworkersandthepoliticsrtJ'educatlort.NewYork.London:Routledge.
Grigsby,J. (1917).Art & ethnics.Dubuque.Iowa: Wm C Brown
Hemandez,F. (2000).Educati1nt culnrrayisrai. Barcelona:Octacdro.
Hicks. L. (1990).A f'eministanalysrsof empowermentand communityin artseducation.Sadies in Art Edtrctttiot,
-12(r).36-46.
Jagodzinski.I (1997).The nostalgiaof art education:Reinscribingthe master'snarrative,Studiesin Art Education.
3B(2).80-95.

14. 828 FREEDMANANDSTUHR
Lanier,V (1969).The teachin-eoi art associalrevolution.Phi Delra Kappan,50(6).314-319.
Lanicr.V (1.974).A plagueon all your houses.NAEAJoumal,27(3), 12-15.
McFee,J. K.. & Degge,R. (1971).Art, utlture, and environment;A catalystfor teacfting.Belmont,CA: Wadsworth.
Mirzoefi, N. (Ed.).(1998).Vsual culturereader.New York: Routledge.
Morley, D. (1992).Television,audiences,and cultural studles.London:Routledge.
Neperud,R. (1973).Art education:Towardsan environmentalaesthetic.Arl Education,26(.3).
Nepenrd,R. (Ed.).(1995).Conren,(ontent,and commwtityin art education.New York:TeacherCollegePress.
Parsons,M. (1998).Integratedcurriculumandour paradigmofcognition in the arts.Studiesin Art Education,39(2),
103-116.
Pinar,W F. (Ed.).(1988).Contemporamcurriculumdiscourses.Scottsdale,AZ: GorsuchScarisbrick.
Pinar,W. F.,Reynolds,W. M., Slattery,P, & Taubman,P M. (1996). Understandingcurriculum.New York: Peter
Lang.
Prosser.J. (Ed.).(1998).Inruge-basedresearcl't:A sourcebookforrlualitativeresearchers.Bristol: Falmer.
Rose,G. (2001).Visualmethodologies.London: Sage.
Rushkol1,D. ( 1994).Media virus:Hiddenagendasin popular culture.Sydney:RandomHouse.
Scollon,R., & Scollon,S. W (1995).Interculturalcomnunication.Cambridge,MA: Blackwell.
Shusterman,R. (1989).Pragnntist aesthetics:Living beauty,rethinkingat't.Oxfbrd: Blackwell.
Slattery,P (1995).Postmodernismasa challengeto dominantrepresentationsof cuniculum. In J. Glanz& L. Behar-
Horenstein(Eds.).Paradign debtttesin curriculumand supervision.New York: Greenwood.
Smith-Shank.D. (1996).Microethnographyof a GratefulDead event:American subcultureaesthelics.Joumal of
Multicultural ond Cross-culturalResearchin Art Education,14,80-91.
Solso,R, (1997).Mind antl brain sciencesin tlrc2lst century Cambridge,MA: MIT Press.
Stuhr P L. (1995).A socialreconstluctionistmulticulturalart curiculum design:Usingthe powwow asan example.
In R. W. Neperud (Ed). Context,content, and cotnmunity in art education: Bel,eni p)t^odernisnr New York:
TeachersCollegePress.
Stuhr,P L. (1999).Responseto Brian Allison's article,"Colour.culture,language,andeducation." Jountal of Multi-
cultural and Cross-culturalResearchin Art Education./8(1). 1'1-15.
Sturken,M.. & Cartwright,L. (2001).Practicesof looking:An introductionto visualculture.Oxfbrd,England:Oxford
UniversityPress.
Tavin. K. (2000). Just doing it: Towards a critical thinking of visual culture. In D. Wiel & H. K. Anderson
(Eds.).Perspectivesin critical tlrcory,: Essal'sby teachersin theon' and practice (pp. 187-210). New York:
PeterLang.
Tavin.K.(2001).Teachinginandthroughvisualculture.Journaltl'MulticulturalandCross-CulturalResearchirt
Art Education.18(l ), 37-40.
Wilson,B., & Wilson, M. (1977).An iconoclasticvrew of the imagerysourcesof the drawingof young people.Art
Education,J0( I ), 5-1 1.
Wilson,B.. Hurwitz. A.. & Wilson.M. (1987).Teachingdrav,ing.frontdrt. Worchester,MA: Davis.