---------------------------··------------------····---------·-·---------.,-··-·-;
.
l
I
I
.
i
l
i.
CALIFORNIA STATE TJNIVERSITY, NORTHRIDGE
I
I
l
I
l
I
!
l!
;
EFFECTS OF GRADING TECHNIQUES
I(
ON
!
ART STUDENTS
A thesis submitted in partial satisfaction of
the requirements for the degree of Master of
Arts in
ART
by
--
Ruth Udin
January, 1973
l
I
! .
The thesis of Ruth Udin is approved:
Caiifornia State University at Northridge
January, 1973
ii
tude and sincere appreciation to the members of the
Committee:
Dr! Paul Kravagna, Ruth Schrier and Dr.
William Kasza, Chairman, for their unselfish efforts
throughout the development of this study.
Special thanks
is extended to Harry Udin for his consultation and assistance_with the statistical procedure.
The author extends personal thanks to Dr. William
Kasza, Graduate Advisor, for his constant guidance and
invaluable assistance.
- - - - - - - · - - - - ---·---···-----.·--·---~---·-···-·
.
----------------,
TABLE OF CONTENTS
page
Acknowledgem~nts.
• • • • • • • • . • . • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ii
List of Tables.....................................
v
List of Figures ...................... ~ ............. vi
I .
INTRODUCTION . ..............................•.
Hypothesis. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Need for the study .•...................••
Limitation of the study .•......••........
Statement of the problem ........•........
Definition of terms. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • • • •
II .
14
20
21
2.3
REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
Harmful psychological effects of the
grading system now being used in the
public schools ........................... 26
Importance of the development of self
evaluation for the stability and
maturity of the student ..•..............• 35
Stimulating the individual's
creativity so that the effects will
enrich his entire life •..............•.•. 40
III.
IV.
V.
PROCEDURE OF THE INVESTIGATION
Selection of the population •...........•.
Classification-and random assignment of
students into experimental groups .•......
Experimental design. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • .
·Experimental treatment .................•.
Testing materials .......................•
Collection and evaluation of the data ....
45
47
47
51
54
58
ANALYSIS OF THE DATA
Overall aesthetic value •............•...• 63
Variety of five or more brush techniques. 66
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
Restatement of the problem .•..........••.
Origin and importance of the problem .....
Review of the procedure .................•
SE?lection of the population.... . . . .. .
70
71
73
73
I
i
!
iii
iv
···-·-------~~-··--·--------··-·------·- · · - · - - - ·-··· · - · - - · - .. ··--
'
., · · - - - -.. ·-·--·~·-····-·- .. · - · - - · - - - - - - - - - - - · - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - · - - · ·.. 11
page
I
I
I
I
Classification and random assignment of students into experimental
groups ............ ., .....
s
•••••••••••
Experimental design .•....•.•.•••....
Testing materials ......•..•.. ~······
Collection and evaluation of the
74
75
76
data ...... *... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
R_esul ts. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Discussionff ........................... .,. 3...
77
79
80
Suggestions for further study .........••..
84
BIBLIOGRAPIN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
*
(I
•
•
•
•
•
..
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
.a
•
•
•
86
APPENDIX A: Forms and instructional booklet
to teachers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
I
I
I
I
i
~
..
91
APPENDIX B: Evaluation and data forms ....•....•. 104
v
1
·----------·--·---------~1-~~:F-~~~E~---_-----
Page
1 .·TABLE
1
I
I.
II.
III.
IV.
l
Experimental groups:
red, green and
r·ed dots ................................ .
47
Grading procedures used in experiment
is identical with public school grading
system in Los Angeles, California •...•.•
60
Analysis of variance summary table for
the dimension-aesthetic value •.•.•••.•••
65
Analysis of variance for The Dimension
"Five or More Techniques" •....••.••.•••.•
68
I
vi
·-----~-------------·-----···
- - - - - - ------------------l
LIST OF FIGURES
Page
FIGURE
1.
Aesthetic value as a function of teacher
and grading method. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . • • .. . . . • • • 64
2.
Mean score for the evaluation of five or
more techniques . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 7
I
I
I
I
r---------------·-. ---------- ------· -· ·- - -· · -·-
--·-··
---------·-""~- ---·----~.
l
ABSTRACT
EFFECTS OF GRADING TECHNIQUES
ON
SENIOR HIGH ART STUDENTS
by
Ruth Udin
Master of Arts in Art
January, 1973
~he
average art teacher at the secondary level
of education teaches about one hundred and thirty pupils
each day.
lt is therefore difficult to assume that
Since art is one of the few areas
that does allow the student to exercise some form of
creative expression, it seems unfair to grade one's
attempt to express his personal concepts and ideas.
Therefore, the following experiment was designed and
carried out.
CONCEPTUAL HYPOTHESIS:
The theory frequently offered by art teachers
infers that the less anxious the individual actually is
during the act of creating a work of art, the better
will be the over-all aesthetic quality of the product.
Such anxiety may be directly related to the probable
frus;t:rations caused by evaluation procedures used in
the grading process.
Viktor Lowenfeld and W. Lambert
Brittain in their book Creative and Mental Growth state:
One of the important aims of art
education is to bring out the
Individual differences that make
up the child's personality. Suppressing them would inhibit the
child's personality.
1
i
l
I
I
there i
would be adequate time to administer proper evaluation
to each child's work.
l
2
----l
· PROCEDURE:
There were three different types of groups used
in this experiment.
Each youngster knew which group he
would be in before the assignment began.
Below are a
breakdown of the groupings.
EXPERIMENTAL GROUPS
GROUP #1: SELF GRADED . • • • • • GREEN DOT
GROUP 1F2: DYADIC GRADING GROUP
INVOLVING STUDENT AND
TEACHER • • . • • • • • YELLOW DOT
GROUP #3: TEACHER GRADED GROUP . . RED DOT
SPECIFICS OF THE EXPERIMENT:
1.
The experiment was divided into three parts on the
first day the lesson was taught.
On the second day
there was an exploratory period, and on the third
day the Assignment was given.
The lesson was a
water color lesson consisting of various uses and
techniques of the brush.
The experiment was conducted by three different
teachers in Senior High Art classes attwo different
Los Angeles City schools, thereby obtaining a large
cross cultural spread.
of seventy two students.
The final sample consisted
l
'i
3
--·----1
r-------· - · ·- ·- - · - ·- ·---.. - - -·
!
i
EVALUATION:
The evaluation of the artistic output· of the three
different grading groups was performed by a professional
group of eleven different educators.
The evaluative
procedures used were identical to those used presently
in the public schools: A=S, B=4, C=3, D=2, F=l.
The
two criteria that were evaluated were:
A.
Five or more brush techniques.
B.
Aesthetic quality.
No specific names or identification marks appeared
on any of the student's work during the evaluation
session.
An identifying number was used for each work
that corresponded to the same number on the evaluation
sheet used by the judges.
RESULTS:
A mean score for each student on both dimensions
was obtained.
Following this a two-way analysis of
variance was performed for each dimension.
The results
of the art work of the three classrooms comprised the
levels of the first dimension.
The three methods of
grade assignment comprised the second dimension.
It was found that all three methods of grading of
1
I.
4
-the art products were essentially alike in terms of
dimensions evaluated.
~~e
There appeared to be a trend to-
wards the teacher only grading method to produce lower
scores than the two techniques in which the student was
involved in the grading venture.
The null hypothesis was
not refuted because of the lack of significant statistical evidence on all dimensions tested.
The analysis
for the above variables failed to prove significant F
values at either the 5 or 1 percent levels of confidence.
Therefore it was not possible to disprove the null
hypothesis.
I
I
I
!
i
i
... ------·-·--
--··-··------·-·-----------
l
INTRODUCTION
Many types of studies have been conducted in both
education and psychology which have dealt with the problem of grading and evaluation of student performance.
(55)
(16)
(40)
(5)
(51)
(54)
(32).
Faculties and
<
students recognize the importance of individual differences as a growing problem in grading procedures.
Max S.
Marshal states:
Our real concern is with the philosopy
behind the scenes. The basic problem is
whether or not to accept the use of any ·
sort of yardstick, percentage, or other
empiracal set of relative symbols to express points on an arbitrary range, spectrum, or scale to represent observations
of alleged abilities of each student. We
must either accept this principle of pointer
and scale in some form; or prove that it
is improper and find a better answer. (39)
In the mid-ninetieth century, the emphasis on
education became widespread in Europe and America.
The
_:__ main purpose of education at that time was to prepare
students for entrance into well known colleges and institutions of higher learning.
During the 1850's the
one room schoolhouse prevailed and usually contained
students of all age levels.
Evaluations of student
progress were mostly descriptive in_nature.
Teachers
would usually record the skills that indicated student
5
'
6
------1
proficiency or deficiency.
The primary purpose of this
I
method was to assist the pupil in his scholastic achieve-
II:
ment and endeavors.
I
!·
Following the passage of the compulsory attendance :
laws during the 1850's, the total number of schools increased.
In 1910 there was- approximately ten thousand
elementary and secondary schools in the nation.
Due to
the vast number of students attending the schools, the
secondar'y schools began using percentages to measure what
! was thought to be student ability in different subject
areas.
One of the major reasons that grading was intro-
duced into the school systems was to aid colleges in
screening applicants for entrance requirements.
In the 1920's, there was a large group of people
who were trying to get away from the concept of grading
altogether.
During this period one of the methods of
evaluation was mastery.
This simply stated that when
the student had mastered one subject he was ready to go
i on to the next one.
'
l
Another method of evaluation also
in use· was verbal description.
This method consis-ted of
: a report written by the instructor where he discussed the
individual students abilities.
The pass-fail system was
'also ·in use in same areas of the country.
In the book,
1
Wad-Ja-Get Howard Kirschenbaum relates:
In the 1920's one study compiled a list of
49 different bases for the various grading
systems being used at that time. There was
mounting evidence that academic grades often
reflected both arbitrary criteria and peculiar value systems of the individual teacher.
l
(35)
In 1912 a study was conducted by Starch and Elliot
which dramatically questioned the reliability of grades
as a measurement of pupil accomplishment.
The purpose
of the study was to determine whether the personal values
and expectations of individual teachers influenced the
grading.
Two English language examination papers,
written by two pupils at the end of their first year in
a large mid-west high school, were duplicated in original
form and sent to two hundred high schools.
Teachers who
taught first year English in these schools were asked to
mark the papers.
One hundred and forty two schools re-
turned graded papers.
-----different scores given.
There were more than thirty
The study was repeated by Starch
and Elliot only this time using a geometry paper.
These
results showed an even greater span in grading results.
During the 1920's and 1930's many schools began
using a five point grading system, A,B,C,D & F based on
percentages.
Some schools method of evaluation consisted
I
I
i
8
.of the use of the terms "Excellent", "Good" and "Fair"
1
instead of A,B,C ••• but based on the ·same percentages.
I
: All· these were attempts to objectify, standardize and
i
simplify the grading process.
Since 1930, two definite opposing groups have
existed:
the first and more progressive group wanted to
eliminate grading entirely, while the second and more
I
I
I
i
conservative group, wanted to retain grading and at the
same time attempt to make it more scientific and
I
I·
objective~
The critics of grading were not advocating the complete
elimination of evaluation of .student progress, because
they did recognize the value of periodic examinations.
Their aim was to try and change the grading process to a
system of better communication, more meaningful evaluation,
and finally, more learning.
By the end of the 1940's the trend iri over eighty
percent of the nation's schools was toward a five point
·~--grcading
system.
The major reasons for this change were
related to both administrative ease of handling and
University admission requirements.
During the student unrest of the 1960's one of the
major needs that the students expressed was a more
meaningful education.
Many faculty members agreed with
9
r·-·-----· - ------·---·········-·-- ---------·-·· --
I
--------· . -· - -- ........ ···- ---· -----
.......------------------------------------------,
I
!,the students who,viewed grades as a major obstacle to
i
getting a better education.
As a result, several of the
1
1
!
colleges and universities began to modify their grading
systems.
Yale University abandoned the numerical scale
and converted to a four point scale:
honors, high pass,
pass, and fail, with no cumulative average computed.
Other colleges and universities shifted to a three point
scale:
honors, fail and pass.
Still other institutions
of learning adopted a two point system:
pass-fail,
credit-no credit, or satisfactory and unsatisfactory
system.
Up to the present time, and for schools as they
are now constituted, no one pattern of reporting appears
to have received general acceptance.
In fact, no
particular pattern appears to be clearly and uniformly
superior at the elementary level.
Robert Ebel states:
In secondary school or college, instruction
_ --·----- ____ .. is departmentalized and a given instructor
sees many students in only a single course.
The instructor is more a specialist con·cerned with his area of knowledge and less
a generalist concerned with students as
persons. Course content has become com-·
plex and difficult to reduce to specific
skills. The parent is now less protectively concerned about the welfare of his ·
offspring. (16)
---------l
As a result of the vast number of colleges and
universities having modified their grading systems, some
!
I
secondary schools have also begun to change their methods
i
: of grading.
The relevance of the A through F grading scale
i
I
currently used in the majority of public school systems
~has
been seriously questioned recently in terms of its
function and possible detrimental effects.
(24) (28)(35) (5) (7) (17).
(55) (42) (43)
However, empirical inquiry
regarding the role and effects of grading systems rarely
occurs within public schools and ongoing classrooms.
-The present study was an attempt to evaluate the
effects of several types of grading on the artistic products of senior high art students.
Students were chos.en
for the experiment from three different classrooms in
two high schools in the Los Angeles area.
secondary schools were:
··--Birmingham High School.
The two
Belmont High School and
The pupils from the two high
schools were randomly assigned to one of the three
following grading groups or conditions:
(1) self-graded
group, (2) self-graded plus teacher graded group (dyadic
grading by both teacher and student), and (3) teacher
graded only group.
The students were asked to complete
"'··-··
11
were informed of the method by which the assignment would
be graded.
All of the participating instructors were
directed to present the assignment according to the
directions provided them.
The objectives of the assign-
ment were clearly defined by the experimentor to both
the teachers and the students involved in the experiment.
The resultant artistic products were to be evaluated on
.
the two specific criteria:
over-all aesthetic quality
and total number of learned brush
techniques~
r--·-·-·--
------~------
. . ·- ·- ----.---
-----------~
. - - - . . . . . -·-·- . . --·--.
~-
·---------~
---
1
HYPOTHESES
I
II
CONCEPTUAL HYPOTHESIS:
The theory frequently offered by art teachers
j
infers that the less anxious the individual actually is
during the act of creating ·a work of art, the better will
be the overall aesthetic quality of the'product.
Such
anxieties may be directly related to the probable frustra-;
II
tions caused by evaluation procedures used in the grading
process.
Viktor Lowenfeld and W. Lambert Brittain in
their book, Creative and Mental Growth state:
One of the important aims of art
education is to bring out the in.._ di vidual -differences that make up
the child's personality. Suppress··ing them would inhibit the-· child '·s
personality. (37)
EXPERIMENTAL HYPOTHESIS:
I.
The mean score of completed art products in
--the area of overall aesthetic quality will be significantly higher in the group in which the grade is determined jointly. by student and teacher as compared with the
group in which the teacher determines the grade.
11.
The mean score of completed art products in
the area of overall aesthetic quality will be signifi1,.2
13
,~--------------------------------
---------------- .. -·--····---------··--···- ...
--------~----------------
leantly higher in the group. in which the grade is deteri
i mined
by the student alone as compared with the group in
i
·which only the teacher determines the grade.
III.
The mean score of completed art products in
, the area of five or more brush techniques will be
. significantly higher in the group in which the grade is
i
: determined jointly by student and teacher as compared
with the group in which only the teacher determines the
grade.
IV.
The mean score of completed art products in
the area of five or more brush techniques will be
significantly higher in the group in which the grade is
determined by the student alone as compared with the
group in which the grade is determined by .the teacher
only.
NEED FOR THE STUDY
This experiment was conducted in an attempt to
establish pragmatically if differentiation in the
senior high ·art student's performance was influenced by
his prior knowledge of the grading method to be used in
the evaluation of his art work.
Senior high art is one
of the classes required for high school graduation and
usually consists mostly of non-art majors.
th~
Consequently,
class usually includes many students who have great
trepidation in relation to their individual artistic
abilities.
The art teacher in the Los Angeles City School
Districts, at the secondary level of education,usually
instructs approximately one hundred and thirty students
each day.
It is therefore difficult to assume that there
would be adequate time to fulfill the individual needs
of each student.
Strom indicates that:
It is fair to say that the concept of
differences has been employed
least in the area where it is most needed;
namely the assessment of achie~ement. (11)
~-individual
Since art is one of the few subjects that does
allow and encourage the individual student to exercise
some form of creative expression, ·it would seem logical
14
15
to assume that
g~ades
that might hamper these objectives
should be carefully analyzed.
Robert Kent and Mark Luca
discuss this problem in the following paragraph.
In art, evaluation becomes part of the
creative process through the impetus
of instruction, the student activities
of learning which involve selecting,
discriminating, organizing, and synthesizing. These activities must be
evaluated on an individual basis and
not according to arbitrarily defined
group standards of achievements. (38)
·The present practice of grading students on a
competitive basis, therefore, might seem extremely
detrimental to the student and his ability to learn.
Ecker and Eisner discuss this in relation to developmental.
stages.
Still another argument is that evaluation
of art by an adult more often than not
rests upon criteria that have little
meaning or relevance to the child. The
world of the child, the types of thought
processes he uses, the way he considers
his work in the field of art, are simply
irrelevant to the type of criteria that
the adult is likely to apply in evaluating his work. Psychologists have in. · dicated that human beings go through a
rather predictable sequence of stages in
their.cognitive development. The child
in the elementary school is still undergoing this process of cognitive development. And to apply criteria through the
eyes of an adult whose stages of perceptual and cognitive development have
reached maturity is not only difficult
I
I
I
.16
r·-------·--·-----·~- ~~~- ~~-~~-~e~:~~-- ~~- ~:~---:~~-~~--~~--is unfair.
'
It is unfair because it tends to make
children feel responsible for meeting
standards in art for which they lack
readiness, hence the typical outcome
is one of breeding a sense of failure
and disappointment in the child. (21)
If the actual learning is expected to occur in any
school situation it will only occur when the student is
free of a fear of inferiority.
John Gowan discusses
this in his article, "Creativity as a Character Trait".
He states:
One of the conditions that effects
creativity is the individual's personal feelings about himself. Each
of us has a mental picture of himself
which governs much of his conduct and
outlook. When one has confidence and
pride in his self image he feels free
to be and to express himself. But
...when this image is a source of shame
the tendency is to hide it rather than
to express it and creative expression
is blocked. (26)
This is congruent with theories held by Glasser,
(24) Rogers, (50) Eisner, (20,21) and many other individuals of expertise in the areas of education, art
and psychology.
faction.
Guy Hubbard discusses student satis-
He states:
Success is a pleasant experience. It
arises when a person realizes that he
can perform effectively in a certain
activity. In art as in other curricu. la.r areas success cannot be measured
I
I
I
17
in terms of what a professional does.
It can be measured, however, with
reference to criteria which-are appropriate to the student's own readiness
for learning. Determining what precisely this level may be for any one
student is a complex and often un- certain task; the function of satisfaction nevertheless occupies a position of high priority in art teaching.
The art teacher not only leads students
toward experiences where they appreciate
their own needs and abilities; the teacher
tries to generate learning by stimulating
student's satisfaction in what they are
doing. (29)
Today, it would seem that anything less than a
grade of A or B usually indicates mediocrity or failure
to many students.
When the student is repeatedly told
that he is inferior as might be assumed via the grading
system commonly used in the public schools, he frequently
attains an attitude that determines his functioning in
this setting, which is an attitude of failure.
Ernest 0.
Melby indicates that:
The marking system is damaging in its
impact on the education of our children.
It should go the way of the hickory
stick and dunce cages. It should be
abandoned at all levels of education.
Our marking system is no longer relevant
to the needs and educational programs of
our society. It says nothing meaningful
about a pupil. It glosses over exceptional effort on the part of some pupils
and lack-of effort on the part of others.
It says nothing about the -most important
l
I
l
outcomes of education. It leads us to
measure the outcomes of our educational
programs in terms of what people know,
when we ought to be measuring them in
terms of what people are and are in the
process of becoming. It tells us little
about what the pupil has done to the
subject he studies but nothing about
what his study of the subject has done
to him. We think we must use this worn
out system to motivate pupils, but all
the studies I have seen show that marks
have no motivating effect. (42)
-,
I
I1!
i
In his book Schools Without Failure, the psychia!trist, Dr. Glasser,states that:
Children are often dismayed by a grade
they believe is a poor estimate of their
achievement. Grades are supposed to
stimulate the child to work harder and
--to learn more, and to stimulate his
parents to see that he does so. The
___ child with the A works to keep it because any lower grade means he is shirking. The child with the F works to
learn enough so that he no longer fails.
(24)
It can be assumed that the person who has acquired
a love of learning may well carry this trait beyond his
school years into adulthood and thereby enrich his life.
! This
is a possibility which may be related to intrinsic
i
i
personal sati~factions and usually does not issue from
·a mere competitive situation.
The question arises, why
- then should we force a competitive situation into an area
- such.as art, where intrinsic values and satisfaction should
l
i
i
18
1.9
r
~~~~-~~~~~;---~a~~- preceden-~~~--. ·-·· ...
i
Irving Kaufman in his book, Art and Education
Contemporary Culture, states:
The heightened interrelationship between
the sense receptors, perceptual understanding and imaginative transformation
lead to an enriched sensibility of feeling. This leads further to the expansion
of one's personal horizon--an enlargement
of the sense of self in both space and
time. This is one of the most characteristic offerings of the arts, its innate
ability to transcend the limits of
ordinary happenings; permitting the in-dividual extension of his experiences
into a realm of vivid and dramatic realization that always possesses a larger
potential. (31)
Lowenfeld and Brittain (35) concur with the
attitude that the art programs conducted at the secondary
level should enhance the growth of the individuals and
assist in the stimulation of self expression.
This study was conducted in an attempt to examine
wh~ther
or not student performance and the overall
aesthetic quality Q"I the art product could be influenced
by the application o£ three specific different art
classroom grading procedures.
These were:
#1, self
graded group; #2; student and teacher graded group; and
LIMITATION OF THE STUDY
To eliminate as many variables as possible, the
experiment was conducted over a three-day period and
consisted o£ The Lesson (page 52), The Exploratory (page
54)and The Assignment (page 54).
Two high -schools
located in different socio-economic sections in the Los
Angeles area participated in the study.
The reason for
this was to assure cultural heterogeniety of all groups
t~sted.
The population consisted of approximately 35%
Caucasians, 20% Oriental, 35% Mexican and South American
and 10% black students.
Three senior high art classes
were chosen for the experiment because it was assumed
that if none of the students enrolled in these classes
were art majors, they would more than likely exhibit
significant anxieties in their creative ef-forts.
The performance task chosen for the experiment
---- __ j
consisted of a water color lesson stressing the use of
a variety of brush techniques.
The method used in the
study was a rather short, yet unique art lesson for non:"'
art majors.
The use of water color paint is quite common
in the Los Angeles City Schools, yet, instruction in
brush techniques- at the lower grade. levels is quite un-
20
21
r----·----·-· ··"··------·-·--·--·-···-----..... , .......
j ~sual.
i,.
,
-~-----
in reality
....................... --·------------.----
'l
this essentially was a new experience
fer the student§ and a desirable condition since it
t~fided
to lessen
the
possible contamination of previous
The teachers who participated in the study were
~iven
explicit procedural instructions throughout the
STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM
This study was concerned with the possible effects
that different grading methods commonly used to grade
senior high art student's work, would ultimately have on
their creative art products.
used consisted
ef #i,
The three grading methods
self evaluation; #2) a combination
of self evaluation on the part of the student along with
evaluation with the instructor; and #3, evaluation by the
instructor only.
A -review of the related literature provided little '
or fio evidence of a similar investigation having been
conducted tn.art education, therefore the need for such
a stutly seemea justified.
Ifi the opinions of Rogers (47), Melby (42), Glasser
(24,.and Hold (28, the current grading systems in use in
22
I many
r----------·--- ......- ..----------------..·--------·-.. ·--------------...-... -------·--·····----- -----··------·---·----------- -·
schools in the U.S.A. are harmful to the students
· self concept, and consequently
l
I
ha~per
learning.
Eisner (19), vJilhelms (58) and Popham (45) suggest
I
that grading work is more successful
I
objectives have been set forth for each assignment.
~
I
~vhen
specific
Beittel (8), Burkhart (13), Beck (7), Bradley (9),
I
j Marshall (39), Hichael (27), Silberman (52), Keiler (34),
I Faunce and Hunshaw (22) and Ahmann and Glock (1), all
Ii
I indicate that they prefer a method of self evaluation
l for students'
art work.
Margaret Mead (2) suggests that
evaluation and grading should be performed in a dyadic
'Il
I
manner, involving the opinions of both student and in-
' structor.
j
It was hoped that by dividing the experiment: into
three sections, The Lesson, The Exploratory and The
II, Assignment,
I
j·
:
l
·1
would help simplify the experiment.
The
instructional technique used was that of teaching the
Lesson on thE: first day.
The second day was for Explor-
j
ation and practice session of the techniques learned.
On the third day the st:udents would be adequately prepared for the Assignment.
li
DEFINITION OF TERMS
Throughout this study the creative products of
senior high school art students are particular to the
i
experiment yet quite general in usage.
OBJECTIVES:
Specific achievement expected of students
in relation to learning, as five or more varieties of
brush techniques, and overall aesthetic values that were
discussed during the experiment.
FIVE OR MORE BRUSH TECHNIQUES:
Relates to the various
specific brush techniques that were taught to the students
during The Lesson.
OVERALL AESTHETIC QUALITY:
Relates to the principles of
design recommended by the Secondary Art Division of the
Los Angeles City Schools.
These same principles were
modified slightly for use in this experiment.
The values
were used to inform the students about compositional
relationships of balance, dominance, rhythm, contrast,
transition and unity.
ANXIETIES:
Refers to probable frustration that students
suffer either covertly or overtly in relation to their
artistic products.
THE LESSON:
The- initial procedure of instructing the
23
I
2.4
..... -··········--·-·-···-···-··· ···--·--------------·---~
students in techniques of using the watercolor brush to
allow him to attain a great variety of brush techniques •
. The Lesson was scheduled on the first day of the experi; mental program.
THE EXPLORATORY:
The actual period which occurred on the
second day and followed the. lesson.
I!
This allowed for
.
' practice and experimentation with the techniques learned
on the previous day.
THE ASSTGNMENT:
The last day of the experiment consisted
of student performance under the three different grading
criteria.
These criteria were as follows:
self grading,
tiyadic grading by student and teacher, and teacher grading
only.
SELF GRADING GROUP:
This consisted of the experimental
group that had randomly been assigned the green dot.
This meant that upon completion of the assignment, the
students in the group were asked to give themselves a
grade using the objectives of the assignment as their
guides.
DYADIC· GRADING GROUP:
yellow dot.
This group was represented .by a
This permitted the students, upon completion
of their projects, the opportunity of consulting the
instJ::uctor and thereby arrive at a final letter grade.
25
The objectives again
wer~
TEACHER GRADED ONLY GROUP:
Ia
II by
I
I
!
red dot.
used-as
~~uide.
~
This group was represented by
In this group, the final grades were assigned
the teacher alone.
I
~
I
CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
ln this chapter, the review of the literature will
include the following areas: harmful psychological effects:
i
of the grading system now being used in the public schools;~
need for operational objectives relating to specific
assignments to assist the student in his ability to be
self evaluative; importance of the development of self-
.
evaluation for the stability and maturing process of the
student and stimulating the individual's creativity so
that the effects will enrich his entire life.
Harmful Psychological Effects of
The Grading System Now Being Used
in the Public Schools
In reviewing the literature concerning the harmful
t psychological effects of the grading system now being
' used in the public schools, there seems to be agreement
among many of the writers, that the psychology of fear
adversely affects the student's ability to learn and to
perform.
The emminent psychologist Carl Rogers (47)
suggests that when we maximize conditions of psychological
26
!
27
safety
a~dfr~edom,
we
structive creativity.
i-~~~se
the development of con-
He postulates the following three
safeguards:
"l.
Accept the individual as of
unconditional worth.
2.
Provide a climate in which
external evaluation is absent
and
Provide empathetic understanding
of the individual.
3.
I
In the publication, "Contemporary Issues in
Educational Psychology, Ernest 0. Melby has written an
article in which he states:
The marking system is not only irrelevent
and mischievous, it is destructive. It
destroys the self-concepts of millions of
children every year. Note the plight of
the deprived child. He often enters
school at six with few of the preschool
experiences that the middle class children
bring to school. We ask him to learn to
read. He is not ready to read. We give
him a low mark--we repeat the low mark
for each marking period--often for as
~~long as the child remains in school.
At
the end of perhaps the ninth grade, the
child drops out of school. What has he
learne-d? He has learned he cannot learn.
We have told him so several dozen times.
Why should he think otherwise?
We have lied to him. He can learn. If
we were worth our salt as teachers and
as a school, we should have asked him to
do things he can do and not what we know·
he can't do. Every day we should have
sent him home with more confidence in
himself, liking himself better than when
28
-----------------..·------------
he came in.
But don't ·tell me it's only the deprived
who suffer from our marking system. All
children are injured. They are injured
because they are induced to seek the
wrong goals--to be satisfied when their
performance reaches a given level, rather
than when they have done their best. (42)
l
Art with its emphasis on creativity seems to be
impractical in the public schools today as long as the
practice of letter grading exists.
In his book, Schools
Without Failure, the psychiatrist, Dr. Glasser, blames
the present system of issuing grades as one of the prevalent reasons for the failure of many children in schools
today.
Probably the negative effects of this system are
not understood by the lay public due to the fact that
grading has become almost traditional in this country.
As Dr. Glasser points out:
If there is one sacred part of education,
revered throughout almost the entire
United States as utilitarian and necessary,
it is A-B-C-D-F grading. Because grades
are so time honored and traditional, anyone-who raises a voice against them finds
himself in the center of a hurricane. The
defects of grades are so obvious, however,
that many prominent people have spoken out
against them. (24)
If a student has been working and exhibiting diligent
effort and involvement in a specific area and completes
a work of art with a sense of fullfillment and accomplish-
I
l
!
29
-----:-1
cruelli
the
The damage to the student's self image is in-
product.
estimable.
I
John Holt discusses this in his·book, How
Children Fail:
What is sad is how much fear there·is in
school. Most children in school are
scared most of the time. Many of them
are very scared. Like good soldiers
they control their fears, live with them
and adjust to them. But the trouble is,
and here is a vital difference between
school and war, that the adjustments
children make to their fears are almost
totally bad, destructive of their in·telligence and capacity. The scared
fighter may be the best fighter, but
the scared learner is always a poor
learner. (28)
,.'
The art educator is in a particularly enviable
position in his capacity to play so vital a role in instilling in his pupils a sense of worth.
The instructor
who is interested in inculcating his students with a
sense of self-value and self-acceptance may use the
vehicle of art to do this.
He will do much toward in-
creasing personal creativity for his students.
Evelyn
Beard says, that as good art teachers the major purposes
for youngsters should be:
1.
2.
To enable personal expression.
To develop aesthetic_sensitiveness.
-
30
~-----··------·-----·------··-_·--·- ·-·-----------------·-----------~-------
~-
1§
~in cultural understanding.
'1figJ:"~ !J.X:~ §~vg:ral
wi-th.
i-~ !.1 §~ni-P:r
variables that. must be dealt
high art class.
~b~t tb~ i~§t~~~t9:r
------,
First and foremost is
I
1
!.
i
:l-$ dealing with a captive audience.
i
i!> t.h@ ·p:roblem of varying ages of the students ;
Ng~t~
tb~';l:"@
(tb~y
wy pg
Qld),
~nywhere
from _fourteen to nineteen years
An9the~ p~9blem
~~~h@~ i~
div~~~gnce
th~
fact that frequently there exists a great
culturally and socioeconomically.
. ~Kpe~iment, the
~eneous
~t:udents
background.
inst~ueto~
that effect students working to-
In this
evolved from a cultural hetero-
This then would inform the art
that art experiences should be planned so that,
,..as _Vietor P 'Amico states:
Th~
least able as well as the most
proficient student will find satisfaction with their projects. This
can be accomplished with activities
that cover a range of activities
from simplistic to complex and will
challenge the abilities of individuals
in the same group. (15)
Need For Operational Objectives
~elating
to Specific Assignments
To Assist the Student in His
Ability To Be Self-Evaluative
When students in a senior high art class are
.31
r----------------------~---------
-----
----~------·------------,
---------,--------------------·
!given an assignment there should be total structure im-J
!plicit in. the lea~ing process.
An adjunct to this would
-
: also provide- for specific objectives relating to the
I
i
I
· lesson, so that the student may know exactly what learning :
;he is expected to acquire.
i
Ronald Silverman (53) dis-
cusses a structured approach in the making of a collage.
i
:A structured approach indicates to the students the neeessary steps involved in a procedure.
These are usually
related to the objectives, and are part of learning GOn·- -- hected with a specific technique.
Silverman relates that
instruction with organization and structure made it possible for his students to produce a more aesthetic collage.
This provided the student with a sense of gratification
..
1
zt'#t";"~~~-·--~
--.
-
which frequently serves as a motivational force for
------
further artistic projects.
Ronald Neperud (43) indicates
that if objectives are to be realized they must be refleeted in operational terms.
Elliott W. Eisner writes
~~'subject:
·Evalu~~ion
has a fairly specific
meaning in education. It is a judgement of the adequacy of behavior as
compared-to a set of educational objectives. This conception of evaluation rests upon the assumption that
educational activities are purposefully
planned and that_they are formulated to
achieve specific ends. While this conception of evaluation is commonplace in
education, it is not as common in art
education. - If it was employed in
the te~ching of art it
32
would require first, a clear formu~
lation of objectives for each
activity included in the· art curriculum. Second, it would require
that the objectives be stated in
terms of desired student behavior
rather than in terms of behaviors
to be displayed by the teacher.
Third, it would require that the
objectives be so clearly stated
that they would be useful in determining if the objectives have or
have not been achieved. (19)
~
I
When the art teacher issues a problem and the
objectives are well defined, the student may continually
r~fer
back to the stated objectives to reinforce his
progress.
In this there exists a definite feedback,
either with positive or negative accentuation, but a
feedbac~
which will
ass~s.t:
in guiding the student in
one direction of performance or another.
Fred R. Wilhelms
in his article "Evaluation as Feedback and Guide states:
People have always operated on ·feedback. Sometimes they do it deliberately. Then they reflect upon their
basic purposes and the values they
--~-~hg_ld, dea1;';_they ponder over how a
situation was worked out to this
point and the problems they have to
solve to achieve-their goal; finally
either slowly or in a flash, they
make up their minds as to what is
the thing to do next. They could not
do this if they lacked a basic sense
of direction, of purpose and values
and criteria to judge by; but neither
could· they do it with growing precision if they did not.have a constant
I
33
··----;t~~am of information feeding back
into their minds out of what was
going on and how it was working.
1
,1
(58)
1
It is for this very reason that specific objectives 1
are so necessary to assist the art student
~n
his per-
formance and decision making during an art project.
In
his article, "The Teacher-Empiricist", W. James Popham
discusses instructional objectives:
Meaningful instructional objectives
must be stated in terms of student
behavior, they must specify the type
of behavior a student will engage
(or be able to engage) when he has
satisfactorily achieved the objective.
In other words the more explicit the
instructor can be- regarding the
statement of instructional objectives,
the better. (45)
Paul Edmonston (17) indicates that due to the
fact that the current cultural milieu places high premium
upon education devices in order to accelerate the development of human capacities to meet new enrivonmental
needs, that clarification of teaching objectives is a
professional responsibility.
This experiment involved two specific objectives
designed into the lesson and emphasized to the students.
This related to the lesson, the exploratory section and
the assignment.
1.
These were:
Use of a variety of five or
34
r~···--~--····-····--·----·--·· -· ·~:~~- ~;--~~-~·-·::w ly ---~-:~r~:~
brush techniques.
2. Use of aesthetic values as re- .
lated to the principles of art
(which were reviewed daily at
the beginning of each session
by the instructor).
1·
1
I
1
l
Kenneth Beittel's (8) studies indicate that student self-
Ii
correction as well as self-direction are both superior
1
methods at accomplishing a more satisfactory art product.
This information would seem to indicate that the inclusion .
,.
of specific objectives would allow the student to selfcorrect and self-direct his own work in relation to the
objectives cited.
This in return would aid the student
in his ability to be self-evaluative.
Vincent Lanier (36)
attests that in most objectives or areas of growth evaluation is difficult.
When the evaluation is external there
is always the question of the validity of the instructor's
judgement.
John Walton (57) discusses pers·onal biases,
halo effects and personality conflicts in relation to imperfections related to external evaluation.
Burckhart
(13), Beck (7), Bradley (9), Marshall (39), Mead (2), and
Read (27), all indicate preference for a method of evaluation that is meaningful to the student.
The method of
self-evaluation is most important for the adolescent to
engage in.
This ability is a great asset for his
'
. 35
I!
Importance of the Development of
Self-Evaluation for the Stability
!
!
and Maturity of the Student
Robert Burckhart (13) discusses the importance
1
l
I
of the process of evaluating a pupil's work.
I: student
i
Each
should have the opportunity to contribute his
i
!
' evaluative insights as this has enormous educational
value.
Evaluation is something he should eventually learn
to do for himself as this provides an important dimension
to his maturity.
There is general agreement that evaluation is an
important part of the teaching-learning process.
Charles
Silberman in his book, Crisis in the Classroom, discusses
the importance of evaluation to the student:
Evaluation is even more important to
the student-himself, since the students
will have to judge their own performance
after they leave school. It is important, too, to provide-as much experience
as possible in self evaluation. (52)
Albert W. Beck, a professor of art at CulverStockton College in Canton, Missouri says:
If self-evaluation were capableof workingJin my opinion it would be the best
possible route to follow. What are the
advantages of the risk?
36
r-·~~--·
-·-·. ----.. . . . . . ._. . . . . . . . . ._. . . . . . . . .--.. . . ____. . ________. ________. . _ . _. ____. . . ._____
~
l
~-
The force is taken away from
an artificial stimulus- for
learning and transferred to
the matter at hand.
2.
Human responses (as opposed to
a mechanical feedback) will begin to break down some of the
\l?alls built up ever the years
now separating the learned from
the learner.
,
I
I
!
I
•
1.
1
I
. . --------------·
1.
l
I!
------~
3
A more reasonable transition
from the classroom to the "life
outside" is forthcoming.
4.
It will be easier to identify
those students who do appeRr
to have a belittling attitude
toward their own ac~hievement
and would harshly downgrade themselves. At the sa-.:IK~ time those
students who seemed to overrate
themselves \vould be more effectively counseled.
5.
Could it be \.:rorse than the present capricious, arbitrary system
we have now?
6.
Would it humanize the evaluation
procedure? (7)
1
I
-·~-,
!
I
!
I
1
William Bradley (9) writes that the current in-
.! •
~d~cators
suggest that students be given the tools and the
!opportunity to evaluate their own progress.
Feldman (23)
i
l states that evaluation is implicit throughou·t the practice
I
l
/of teaching and values are an inherent part of the artis1
I •
i t~c
•
experlence.
'
!
(2)
37
-·----1
I
Ma.rgaret Mead discusses creativity and the problems~
She differentiates the two aspects of evalu-
evaluation.
I
!
ation into internal evaluation, or self evaluation, and
external evaluation, evaluation by the instructor.
The
value of the creative person's product is established not
by the praise or criticism of others, but by himself.
He
alone has the ability to appraise his own product in relation to standards that he has determined for himself.
External evaluation, or evaluation by others is often
invalid due in part to a lack of criteria for evaluation.
Margaret Mead suggests:
The invalidity of contemporary judgments is found on the frontiers of all
human disciplines. Fabulous sums are
paid today for paintings by artists
of an earlier day who died in poverty
and scorn. (2)
External evaluation is the judgment the instructor
makes in the classroom that relates to a student's artistic project.
Because this external evaluation is associa-
ted with the power of issuing a grade that might indicate
a negative opinion of the student's artistic product, the
individual's ·ability to produce to his highest abtlity
may be effected.
Power over another person exists with
external evaluation.
Margaret Mead states:
Another possible way of regarding
f
I!
38
r·------------------------------------------------··1
l
evaluation is to see it as evergoing
through a process of participation;
of two way communication, mutuality,
interweaving of desire, goals, purposes, through spontaneous meaningful
change in interacting with other.. (1)
ll
I
l
One of the grading methods used in this experiment
is a mutual dyadic method of evaluation.
This consists
t
of a combination of opinions, the students and the int
structors.
Together they discuss the accomplishment of
the student's project, and mutually arrive at a lettergr~de.
This method is devoid of power over each other
and it may offer a better communication of understanding,
spontaneity and harmony.
Elliott W. Eisner (20) states that there is a need
for radical alteration of current evaluative mechanisms.
He suggests that this must occur at the elementary, secondary and college levels.
John A. Micheal (27) indicates
that the problem associated with evaluation are detri-
the adolescent.
The concern here is with measurement of
growth as evidenced by behavioral change along with the
art products.
Keiler (34) indicates that at the senior
high level guided self evaluation is often most effective
as ftcan help raise standards for attitude and achievement.
Jerome Bruner (12) states that as learning pro-
39
~------·
-----,
~ gresses there is a point at which it is better to shift
away from extrinsic rewards toward the intrinsic rewards
inherent in solving one's own problems.
!
I
I
The question of what is being evaluated in the art :
class is pertinent here.
I
Evaluation should usually include:
an intimate understanding of the pupil, the.process and
the product.
Carl Reed indicates that:
Only a very general scale can be
devised for evaluating creative
products, as creativity itself is
such a uniquely personal and individual affair. The product
isolated by itself is of little or
no worth in evaluation. The process
and the product are organically intertwined. So our evaluation must
be given in terms of what we know
from having watched the creativity
from its inception through completion.
The creative process is not only an
indication of growth but also an
instrument of growth. (48)
Guy Hubbard (29) states that both process and
, product are obvious parts of the general task of evaluation, and both fall within the range of evaluation that
goes on while a program of instruction continues.
As long as the present grading system exists
instructors should structure their assignments in such a
way as to allow the student to become actively involved
in a self-evaluative process that would enable him to
... assume responsibility for arriving at a grade.
This
Ii
40
r-------·-----~----·----·---·----------------·
! responsibility
----
teaches the student that the grade is re-
l
lated to his accomplishment through his own· efforts,
ability and evaluation of the project.-
1
!Empirical findings'
by the author in this study have indicated that the mass
tendency of the majority of students involved in the self
evaluative process is to under-estimate their own accomplishments.
When a poor self image exists it may in
part be due to poor grades that have become self fullfilling'prophecies due to the grading systems.
This may
partially be due to the fact that for so many years
students have been evaluated competitively with their
peers.
Walter M. Rhoades (49) describes a system that
- evaluates pupils in competition with one another as being
woefully inadequate.
----·--~system
A preferable situation would be a
that recognizes achievement in terms of the ex-
hibited ability of the individual student.
--------- . Stimulating the Individual's
_ Creativity so that the Effects
will Enrich his Entire Life
Herbert Read (46) discusses works of art as the
liberation of the personality.
temp~ation
He indicates that con-
of a work of art assists in the release of in-
hibited or repressed emotions along with a heightening of.
I
41
sublimation.
•
e J.n
i
The psychologist Carl Rogers seems to--:.--:lb
agreement as he describes the following indispensable
components of the creative process:
Ii
A human being in flow, in proces.s,
rather than having achieved some
state .•• sensitively open to all of
his experiences ••• his environment •.•
other individuals .•• and sensitive
perhaps most of all to the feelings,
reactions, and emergent meanings which
he discovers in himself. (50)
Every person has the ability within himself to
attain some form of creative expression.
not occurred due to some unfortunate early
Usually this has
discou~agement
in his life, that has caused· repression in this vitally
sensitive area.
It is well within the province of the
art educator to re-institute the ability for creative
thinking and productivity.
Ronald Neperud (43) indicates
in his article, "Changing Concepts in Teaching Art", that
the transfer value of creativity experienced in the visual
arts process, was and still is considered one of art
. ·--·····--·-·-· .! ·-
...
education's strongest assets relating to the elementary
and secondary curriculum
Lowenfeld and Brittain (37) in their book,
Creative and Mental Growth, have delineated eight basic
aspects of creativity, which have emerged from their
studies of the arts and the sciences.
I
One factor in the
I
42
_____........
--··· ---·-·-··· ... --·. ----·····--·····--·------.-------------··· --·f creative repertoire is sensitivity. A person with sensi~-------------
l tivity
l
is alert to the attitudes and feelings of other
people and living in general.
This sensitivity when
transferred to a work of art is most exquisite.
is also a vital part of the creative process.
Fluency
This is the
ability of an individual to produce a great number of
ideas in a comparatively short range of time.
Another
indispensable aspect of creativity is flexibility or the
ability to re-adjust quickly and effectively to new ·
situations.
In the field of art this might relate to the
utilization of the happy accident.
Originality is per-
haps the most universally acknowledged attribute of
creativity.
This is central to the core of living an
exciting and enriched life.
The original thinking person
will evolve new and different approaches to long existing
problems.
Art at all levels tends to stress the uniqueness
of response that makes the endeavor wholly individual as
well as original.
Rudolph Arnheirn (3) says that origin-
ality is the unsought and unnoticed product of a gifted
artist's successful attempt to be honest and truthful.
The ability to re-define or re-organize information is
another important trait related to creativity.
This would
involve the re-organization and use of old well known
43
materials and methods, along with the addition of new
objects.· The ability to develop abstract thinking is
yet_another attribute of the creative person, involving
the ability to analyze a problem in parts thereby visualizing specific relationships.
Thus evolves the ability
to synthesize and combine elements in a unique manner and
evolve with a new form.
Last, the ability to organize
the parts and re-assemble them together into a meaningful
manner.
Authorities seem to agree that the aforementioned
traits related to creativity in art are generally.enriching factors in human life.
It is the province of the
instructor of art to attempt to develop these desirable
traits in students through the media of the studio.
James F. Wise (59) states that the primary goal
of art education is the development of aes-thetic sensitivity in individuals.
. ________ J
__
~
Cyril Burt (14) discusses the
issue_ that almost_eve:ry _girl _and boy is capable of some
degree of aesthetic education.
Effective education in
this area must be adapted to age, personal interests and
aptitudes.
Pauline Johnson (30) says that aesthetic
education begins with the sharpening of sensibilities to
art forms through the experience of the formal properties
44
~f design
and composition.
Eugene F. Kaelin (31) refers
to aesthetic education as the means-available for opening
the student's universe.
In the environment of many art classes freedom
of expression is encouraged, and this is intimately related to the creative process.
W. Lambert Brittain (10)
indicates that the student of art is fed ideas, principles
and technical advice when need arises, yet with progress
he is thrown upon his own devices to discover solutions
to. his problems.
Herbert Read (47) states that education
through art aims to create growth, and endow each.individual with imaginative power.· Elliot W. Eisner (18)
suggests that experience in the arts tends to encourage
individuals to see interrelationship of things.
This
assists in the development of the sensibilities necessary
for human concern.
sense of the world.
.. __ i
The arts thereby enable us to make
Abraham Maslow (41) tells us that to
the sqphisticated person the question of aesthetic experience is of utmost concern as a rich and valuable experience.
This may one day encompass all of humanity.
CHAPTER III
.PROCEDURE OF THE INVESTIGATION
This chapter contains the various steps and procedures which were employed in the investigation.
This
includes: selection of the population, classification and
random placement of children into experimental treatment
groups, experimental design, experimental treatments and
testing materials and collection and evaluation of the
data.
Selection of the Population
This experiment was conducted at the following
two high schools in the Los Angeles City School District;
Belmont High School and Birmingham High School.
Three
certificated art teachers were involved in all of the
procedures carried out in classroom situations.
The
student population involved in the investigation represented diverse cultural backgrounds which included the
following; about 35% Caucasians, 20% Orientals, 10% Negroes
and 35% Mexican and South Americans.
The ages of the
students used ranged from fourteen to nineteen years.
The experiment was performed in three different senior
45
46
---------·
Ihigh school art classes with a
!two students.
I!were
~------~·------
total sampling of seventy
All procedures used in the investigation
identically prepared and distributed to each of the
!
I classroom
instructors involved in the investigation.
li
jOrientation discussions and demonstrations of the techiniques involved throughout the experiment were presented
I
I
I to all participating instructors prior to their presenta'
t tion to
each of their classes. Irtstructional materials
; used:
1.
An instructional manual for the
teacher.
2.
An envelope containing the slips
of color-coded papers, i.e., red,
yellow and green.
3.
Thirty pieces of white color-coded
art paper for student's use.
4.
A list of the principles of art
that were to be used in the class
review by the art instructor.
5.
A color-coded role sheet to be used
by each art instructor.
6.
Two separate charts: one of which
listed and described the three colors
and how they were to be used in the
evaluation of the art work, and the
other contained complete instructions
regarding the objectives of the assign~·
ment.
"1
I
!
l
I
I
!
47
r---------~-----'-·---
i
'
-----------------·----- ----------------------
l
Classification and Random Assignment of Students
into Experimental Groups
I
I
Table 1
!!
_EXPERIMENTAL GROUPS.
Group #1:
Self-graded ••••••••••• Green Dot
Group 1f2:
Dyadic graded ••••••.•• Yellow Dot
Group 1fo3:
Teacher only_ graded ••• Red Dot
In order that random assignment of students to
specific conditions would result, the instructor in calling role on the specific day of the assignment, required
that each student present was asked to draw a slip of
paper out of an envelope; the slips of paper having been
color coded and numbered accordingly.
Ten of these slips
of paper were coded with red dots, another ten had green
dots, and the remaining ten contained yellow dots.
After
selecting the slips of paper, the student reported the
color and_ the number on the slip to the instructor.
The
teacher then recorded the information on the role sheet
for further use during the experiment.
Experimental Design
The experiment was designed to be administered in
three separate sessions.
The sessions were divided into
48
1
~-h~ --£~11~;i~~:---
I
I
- ---
- ---------- ·--··- ----------------------------·
1
1.
The Lesson, presented to the class
on the first day of the experiment.
2.
The Exploratory (or practice
session) occurring on the second
day of the experiment.
3.
The Assignment (actual student
performance) was carried out on the
third day, and was analyzed statistically.
The procedure used in the experiment involved use
of water color paints with an instructional emphasis· on
developing a variety of brush stroke techniques.
speci~ic
The
objectives of the art lesson stressed the use
of five or more varieties of brush stroke techniques,
along with the promotion of over-all aesthetic quality.
The specific principles of art which were reviewed by ·
each instructor in each class were those taught in art
classes of the Los Angeles City School District Senior
High Art Instructional Handbook for Teachers.
The actual lessons taught consisted of the process
of shaping behavior in relation to the acquisition of
new knowledge.
th~
This involved the introduction and
demonstration of various types of brush techniques.
As
the instructor explained the process, the technique was
demonstrated by the instructor.
Thus the student learned
49
r--·--···-----------------------·--------·· ····--·---·-----···--·----------"--·>·---·------···------·-·-·---·1
and practiced each different brush stroke until he had
I
···---·~---
I
I
!
mastered the specific technique.
After mastery of each
technique was evident by the student's performance, the
instructor would proceed with a new technique.
The Exploratory section occurred on the second
I
l
I
day.
The students were asked to use only the technique
learned on the previous day and practice painting a
j series of figures which included fish, plants, animals,
l etc.
This period of time was p·rimarily intended as a
i practice period for the students to improve their brush
.I
I
' techniques.
On the experimental day, the last day of The
Assignment, the students were randomly assigned to the
I
grading groups.
Explanations were·issued to all students
II regarding the grading procedures to be used.
Follov1ing
I
this orientation the students were then advised to create
l
a water color painting making use of their ne-v1ly acquired
I
brush techniques; and at the same time, utilizing the
principles of art previously reviewed.
When the work was
completed, the evaluation process then was performed by
the students in accordance with the specific grading
procedures outlined·for the various groups.
The following announcement was made by the in-
II
50
-·-----·-· ---rI structor
·-·-··-~ -··---------~- ··-·-------~----
________,___,_____ . . --· . ---------------·-•·» ....----------.-.. --,
prior to giving the assignment:
"In this
I'
I
procedures can or will actually effect the quality of
II
the student's art work".
assignment I am hoping to find out if different grading
The instructor then went on to
explain the meaning of the different colors being used.
He then displayed the information on a poster placed in
j
I
view of the class in order that each student· could
ascertain into which specific grading group he had been
placed and exactly what the significance of each color
was.
The individual colors were shov.rn on the chart as
j follows:
l
Green Dot ..•.. #l Self grading
I
Yellow Dot .•.. #2 Teacher and student
grading combined
I
Red Dot .•••.•. #3 Teacher only grading
II
Ii
T_he green dot signifying self evaluation, the yellow dot
signifying dyadic evaluation by student and instructor,
and the red dot indicated teacher evaluation.
I
i
The teacher's specific instructions to his class
were as follows:
"Try to create a picture using your
mvn choice of subject matter, e.g., landscapes, seascapes,
etc.
Try making use of the new brush techniques which
you have been taught during the past few days in your
l
I
·
·
..
51
r,~~r~~----;~~---~~~~t~~-- t~~--~~~~~~;---;~--~echniques you use while 1
! keeping
the principles of art in mind will in turn give
,I
'.
you a most beautiful result.
At the completion of this
assignment the grading processes were then used by the
classes.
The actual grading procedure performed by the
student was designed as an .integral part of the experiment)
in order to discover whether or not student anxieties in
relationship to grading actually existed and could in
fluence 'the aesthetic quality of the final art product.
Following the grading all of the art work was collected
and kept by the instructor.
Experimental Treatment
Procedure:
1.
2.
3.
The Lesson (first day).
The Exploratory (second day).
The Assignment (third day).
A Water Color Painting Involving A Variety Of
Brush Techniques
Materials:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Water color paint boxes.
Oriental brushes.
Containers for water.
Paper towels.
Three sets of paper.
A-One for The Lesson.
B-One for The Exploratory·
C-Set of paper specially prepared
for The Assignment, numbered
and color coded.
I
52
r----~
I
lA·
l
1. LESSON (First day)
.
Teacher's Instructions to the Class Regarding Prepara-!
I
i
tion of Materials.
1.
Wet (puddle) the black color and
two other colors.
2.
Don't worry about mistakes-; just
continue to work with the class
and try not to fall behind, you
will be able to practice later.
3.
Paper should be held vertically
and folded in half three times;
this will give eight separate
horizontal areas to work in.
4.
Put your name on the back of
this paper,- at the bottom right
hand· section.
5.
All papers will be collected
at the end of the period.
-·~-~------~
l
I!
-~----...--~----
Teacher's Instructions To Students
"We are going to have a lesson on the various uses
of the brush; now wet your brushes and .... dip the brush
into the black paint and using only the tip of the brush,
-i----·
perform a series of thin, short, horizontal and perpendic- .
· ular lines.
· width.
Try to make each line similar in size and
If you are doing this correctly, the lines should
be very thin.
Practice doing this on the first line of
the paper4
On the second line, repeat the perpendicular and
53
1-·-----~-----
!
--"'······"·--· ....... -·-· ·--··. . .. . .
-~
-·--····~····-·
................. ··--···-··---·--------·-----·---·-·--·---·--·-l
horizontal short strokes, but now by pressing down hard
on the paper, while the brush is loaded with paint, you
will achieve wide lines.
Practice this technique on the
second line.
On the third line, combine the thick and thin
strokes.
To do this, do not remove the brush from the
page while making this combination; this should be
executed in one stroke.
On the fourth line combine two colors on the
brush.
This is accomplished by putting the side of the
brush in one color, and the other side of the brush in
another color.
Then use the number three technique and
-·· .. invent f-lowers, fish, .birds; always remembering to use
as little detail as possible.
On line five, do the number four lesson, but
allowing the brush to run dry--this is called a dry brush
technique.
-------Dip the brush- in the water and get it very wet-then. __ dip only the tip of the brush into the black paint.
Make a series of flowers and note the great variety of
values that will result.
Repeat all of the above on wet paper to discover
what a wet on wet effect can achieve.
:
54
.specific technique which was being taught.
,then circulated among the students
The instructor
and when necessary,
demonstrated the specific techniques.
When the instructor
.felt that each student had comprehended the technique, he
would then proceed to the next planned technique.
11.
The Exploratory (second day)
On the following day, after completing the above
lesson, the students were given a clean piece of paper to
work on.
Following a review of the principles of art, the
students were then instructed as follows:
"Practice the
techniques learned yesterday and use only the new techniques learned and create a series of fish, flowers,
plants, animals, birds, etc.
Try to eliminate detail as
this will give you a more successful result.
One period
of approximately forty five minutes was provided for this
procedure.
resting Materials
111.
Preparation:
The Assignment (third day)
Prior to the assignment, the following
written instructions were issued to each of the
instructo~.
55
j This -~as done in
or~er- that rand~
distributions of grad-
ling criteria could be achieved.
I
I
.
!Teacher's Instructions Regarding the Assignment.
i
1.
Open the sealed envelope and call
the role.
2.
When the student answers, have him
come up to the teacher's desk and
choose one of the slips from the
envelope, all have been color-coded
and numbered in advance.
3.
The instructor should ask what number
is on the slip of paper.
4.
Instructor then records the number
on the role call form that was included in the teacher's packet.
5.
The instructor then gives the student
the 11aperwith the corresponding
number on it, which has been colorcoded in advance so as to indicate
which of the three groups he has
been assigned.
Groups
Green Dot •••••• #l Self graded group
Yellow Dot •••. • 4F2 Dyadic grading group
Red Dot ••.••••. #3 Teacher grading group
The- ins'tructor then records the student Is name
· along side of the corresponding number and color on the
Role Sheet.
After this procedure has been completed, the
actual assignment is ready to begin.
The instructor then
56
r---· ·--..... ------··-··.
_,~
.--- ----- .
---~--
-·
·~---
··-- --- . .-.. .
!announces the following to the class:
~ent
~-- ~-·--·----- -~-3~--------~-----~---~-----,
uFor this assign-
I am hoping to find out if various grading and eval-
i
!
uation practices can actually effect the quality of art
:work produced in an art class."
A large grading card is
then placed on the board and read to the class.
This is
I
done in order that the students will understand what the
:colored dots on their papers signify and to which exact
group they belong.
The card is then left in full view of
the class until the Assignment has been completed.
After this preparation period is over (the entire
process should not take more than ten minutes) the Assignment is begun.
Teacher's Instructions to the Class Regarding the
Assignment
Create a picture using your own choice of subject
matter; as landscape, seascape, undersea life, etc ••• using
the new techniques that you have been learning.
The
·greater variety of brush-techniques you usewhile you are
keeping the principles of art in mind, will_give you the
most beautiful result.
This Assignment should be finished and turned into
the teacher at the end of the period, after the grading
has been done.
'
57
_____......"..................... ... ............ . . .... .... . . - --·
-.............................
·f
The work of the three groups will be evaluated
----------------"-----------~
i
I in
relation to achieving these specific objectives.
(A
large card listing the following objectives was also
placed on the board in full view of the students).
Objectives:
1.
Use a variety of five or
more of the new techniques
that you have learned thus
far.
2.
Paint the picture in the
most beautiful and creative
way that you can, trying
- .... to keep in mind what you
have learned about the
principles of art.
Evaluation Procedure by Students Following the Assignment
- 1.
Collect all-- of- the papers with the -red dots, as these
are the teacher graded group.
2.
The students who have a green dot on their papers are
to give themselves the grade they think they deserve,
.. -,
in relation to the stated objectives.
3;-·--- Each student having a yellow dot ·on his -paper should
be called individually up to the teacher's desk to
discuss the grade.
Thestudent sho:uld be asked to
count the various techniques that he used.
This
should relate to the grade administered, as well as
his satisfaction with the picture in relationship to
·
58
_I
~~-~h~·;·~~~-~-~~-~~~--o;---~-~~------~~~-~~~~-~~-~~~~~--;h;ul~-~he~---be .......
,
I
I
l
.
suggested by the student to the teacher and if there is
I
!
mutual agreement then the grade is affixed to the piece
·
I
'
j
of work.
At the end of the Assignment, all papers were collected
l
by the instructor and were returned to the experimenter.
I
I
!
Collection and Evaluation
of the Data
Following the completion of the experimenta.l
. II
Assignment the student grading
'~"tlas
performed.
All of the
projects were then collected and matted i.n preparation
II for
the evaluation process by professional artist teacher
judges.
The committee of judges was instructed to use
I
I
the Los Angeles City Schools District criteria for grad-
j·
ing the art work.
The following tvlO areas evaluated were:
I
1.
Five or more brush techniques.
I
2.
Overall aesthetic value as
related to the principles of
art.
!
Throughout the evaluation procedure all of the
students' names and color groups vlere unknown to the
judges.
This was accomplished by assigning a coded
number to each of the student work that was randomly
placed on the exhibition wall for evaluation purposes.
I
59
I
c···------ ---------'·------·-- --- ---. --
- "----··--- .. ----. -·--------- ·----·--·"-----------------------·------,
The evaluation procedure used was somewhat identic&:
{
to most presently employed by art teachers in many public ,
..
-:. • .-
...
~·
i
··>;'"
l.
·-
school systems, i.e., letter grades of A.B.C.D.F.
Each
grade was given a numerical value similar to those used
in most schools.
60
·-· · ---- --- -.----- -----------------·--·--·---_--·l
I
TABLE 11
i
GRADING PROCEDURES USED IN EXPERIMENT IS IDENTICAL WITH
PUBLIC SCHOOL GRADING SYSTEM IN LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA
Grade
Nmnerical Value
Explanation
A . ........ -· ... 5 . ............... Excellent
B ............. 4 ................ Above Average
C............. 3 ................ Average
D ••••• _•••••••• 2 •••••••••••..•.. Below Avel:-age
F ........•.... 1 ....... ....... .. Failure
There were eleven judges involved in the evaluation and grading
proces·s-~
- Of the eleven, seven were
professional art educators with a minimum of two years
teaching experience in the public schools.
The other
four judges were graduate art majors and Masters Degree
candidates.
-"·-· -··--·
·---
Just prior to the evaluation, a demonstration of
the brush techniques which had been taught by instructors
to the students,. was again demonstrated to the judges in
order that they might become more familiar with the
various techniques they would be expected to evaluate.
Ii
61
r- · ·------ .
The list of the
pri.nciples---~f---~;t----~-~-~--d-i;;:··-th;·-r:~-~-,
!
Angeles City Schools Art Department was also given to the
evaluators
~o
that they could familiarize themselves with
the material learned by the students in relation to this
assignment.
Xerox copies of the page in the role books of the
Los Angeles City Public Schools, were handed to the
judges for their inspection.
Special emphasis was placed
on the "Subject Achievement" section at the bottom of the
page.
Two different evaluation forms were issued to the
judges participating in the evaluation.
One form evalu-
ated the variable involving the variety of five or more
brush techniques.
value.
The second form involved aesthetic
All evaluation was to be made on a scale with a
range from five to one, i.e., 5=A,4=B,3=C,2=D and l=F.
r-..
........ --·· . . . "····· . .., . . . .
-~----
. .. .. . . ·········--·-.. . . . . . . . -·-···.··--····-··-------------------··---l
i!
CHAPTER IV
ANALYSIS OF THE DATA
For the purposes of data analysis, the letter
grades of A,B,C,D and F were converted to the respective
numbers 5,4,3,2 and 1.
Sc~res
for each product on each
dimension (aesthetic quality and five or more brush
techniques) were summed and divided by eleven to obtain
the mean score.
An analysis of variance was then perform-
ed on these scores for each of the dimensions .
. The statistical procedure used was a two-factor,
fixed-effects analysis of variance (Hays, 1963) .. The
factors were:
1.
Method of Grading
2.
Instructors
Factor one was comprised of the three grading methods:
1.
Student graded
2.
Teacher--and- student graded
3.
Teacher graded
Factor. two was comprised of the three teachers: N,_ A & T.
62
i
63
r-····-----·-·-··--···--·-·---··----·---------··-·-~---·--·----·--··-----
----------·····--------·--------l
I
.
I
!I
A ESTHETIC QUA LITY
I
!
I
I I.
OVERALL AESTHETIC QUALITY
!I
To determine an evaluation score for each subject,
1
i
Ieleven
I! a
I
evaluators independently rated each protocol on
scale of 1 to 5, where 1 represented "failing" and 5
jrepresented "excellent".
The resulting eleven evaluations
I
!were then averaged to obtain the score for each subject.
!These scores were then subjected .to an analysis of
I
!variance according to the procedure given by Winer (1962),
l
"I
i for
unequal sample sizes using the unweighted means
I
I solution.
I
Figure I shows the mean scores for "OVERALL
IAESTHETIC VALUE"
1
method.
as a function of teacher and grading
I
I
I.
,--->---------------------------·------------I
···-·-·--·----·------·----------------·--·----------"'---~1
]fiGURE
I
I
.
i
I
!
OVERALL
l
QUALITY AS A FUNCTION OF
TEACHER AND GRADING METHOD
~ESTHETIC
!I
;
~~
.I
l
I
EVALUATION SCORE FOR AESTHETIC QUALITY
5
4
o--
~an
Evaluation
Score 3
For
Aesthetic
Quality
~
--
__o __
-----o
T
"- - -- - -- -y.. A
----!"'
---N
~-
··------------~.--
2
I
I
teacher
graded
teacher
and student
graded
student
graded
Figure 1--Mean evaluation score ~rade) as a function of
expected grading method for the dimension "aesthetic 11
quality" for three senior high art classes.
*T,A, & N stand for the three different teachers involved.
·.
65
r--·~--
...
¥
~- ··~···-
IrThe
,. - - - - - -·-·-
··--····--
--~----~·
-~-
••
--·
~.
-· -----···
•••• - - - - - - - · - · · - ; . ,
-~---~
- - - · · - - · ._.... . . . _
sunnnary for the analysis of variance for aesthetic
_!quality is given in the following table:
1
lI
I
I
TABLE III
I
I
ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE SUMMARY TABLE-OVERALL AESTHETIC VALUE
! SOURCE OF
SUM OF
DEGREES OF
F
MEAN
VARIATION
SQUARES
FREEDOM
SQUARES RATIOS:
I
'
TEACHERS
7.5
2
3.75
.128
GRADING METHOD
0.0
2
0.00
.00
TEACHERS· X
GRADING METHOD
6.0
4
1.50
.051
1941
66
WITHIN CELL
(erro~)
29.4
The obtained values of freedom indicated that
neither the columns, rows or interaction effects were
significant, (P.05 in all cases).
Thus, these data
provided no evidence against the null hypothesis that all
groups were equivalent in terms of aesthetic value.
66
, II •. FIVE OR MORE BRUSH TECHNIQUES
Evaluation scores for this dimension·were also
. determined by averaging over separate evaluation scores
from each judge.
An analysis of variance was then performed on these
data according to the procedure given by Winer (1962),
for unequal sample sizes.
Figure II shows the mean scores
fot: "FIVE OR MORE TECHNIQUES" as a function of teacher and
grading method.
67
r-------------
FIGURE II
!
!
OR MORE
TECHNIQUES
:I
MEAN EVALUATION SCORE FOR FIVE
.
. .
.
_o__
o- -
- - --c T
A
N
4
EVALUATION
SCORE ON
FlVE OR
3
TECHNIQUES
MORE
2
teacher
graded
teacher
and student
graded
student
graded
EXPECTED GRADING METHOD
Figure2--Mean evaluation score (grade)
as a function of expected grading method
for three senior high art classes. The
three curves are for the three different
classrooms contributing to the study.
*T, A & N stand for the three
different teachers involved.
68
,I. II.. . . . . . . "FIVE
-· -· - - - - .OR. .. . MORE
. . . . . . TECHNIQUES
. · - · .. . . . . . - - · - - - -:· - - - ----------------·-·------l
I
Evaluation scores for this dimension were also
II
I.
determined by averaging over separate evaluation scores
from each judge.
Analysis of variance was then performed on these
data according to the procedure given by Winer (1962),
for unequal sample sizes.
Figure shows the mean scores
for "FIVE OR MORE TECHNIQUES" as a function of teacher
and grading method.
FIVE OR MORE TECHINQUES AS A FUNCTION OF TEACHER AND
GRADING METHOD
TABLE 5
.ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE FOR THE DIMENSION "FIVE OR MORE
TECHNIQUES 1 1
SOURCE OF VARIATION
TEACHERS
ss
df
MS
10.5
2
5. 25
.16
F
GRADING METHOD
3.75
2
1.87
.00
TEACHERS X
GRADING METHOD
.75
4
.18
.00
WITHIN. CELL (error)
2202
66
33.3
As was the case for aesthetic value, the obtained
values of F indicated that neither the columns, rows, or
inte~action
effects were significant (P .05 in all cases).
69
f .These
-~-----·-----------·-·-···---------------·-······--·-
I
I
data provided
no evidence to contra-indicate the
.
i
; null hypothesis that all groups equivalent in terms of
'
; measure uFIVE OR MORE BRUSH TECHNIQUES 11 •
I
the I
I·
I
I
I
I
r-·-----
-------~-----··--------
........ -·- ...... -.. .-
............. ------------------------1
!i
CHAPTER V
I
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
This .chapter will encompass the following areas:
restatement of the problem, origin and importance of the
problem, review of the procedure, results, discussion,
conclusions and recommendations for further study.
Restatement of the Problem
This study was concerned with the possible effects
of three different grading criteria on the artistic
products of senior high art students.
The review of re-
lated literature provided little or no evidence of any
similar investigation having been conducted in the field
of art education that dealt with the effects or influence
of grading methods on art products of senior high art
students.
- The need for such a study seemed justifiable in
view of the fact that much psychological harm to students
is attributed to the problem of school grading.
It was
hoped that by applying various experimental treatments in
the grading procedures to randomized groups of senior
high art students, would provide significant evidence as
70
. 7.1
r-------------~-------·----··--~------·-
·-
··------~-
--·-- ..
-·------- ·-
--··-~----·------------------------~
rto the effects that these incentives may have had on their
I
, creative products.
I
Origin and Importance of the Problem
Since the advent of the one room schoolhouse in
the 1850's much progress has occurred in expanding the
physical facilities for educating young men and women.
Following the compulsory school attendance laws, secondary
schools were established to help house the huge influx
of students coming into the public schools.
Due to
increased numbers of students attending school, old
methods of teacher evaluation had to be replaced.
In the
one room school house the instructor recorded skills that
the student was proficient or deficient in.
This in-
formation was presented to the student and parents with
~·
--
the intent of helping the student in his pursuit of
knowledge.
There was no competitive component attached
to this evaluation in relation to the peer group.
Today (1972) the problem of mass education and
the problem of evaluation and grading are enormous.
So
many different methods of grading are in use in schools
throughout the United States, that when a student moves
from one school district to another, the transferred
grades are
frequ~ntly
meaningless in the new schoql
72
~y~-te:.---;o~~
school
district-s-~se
a two point sys tern
I such as the pass-fail method of grading.
Ia
~
Others may use
three point system, i.e, high-pass, pass and fail, as
I their method of evaluation.
By the end of the 1940's the
trend in over 80% of the nations schools was toward a
five point system of grading, A,B, C,D and F.·
As Ahmann and Glock (1) have stated, these grades
are difficult to assign for the following reasons.
The
teacher's uncertainty as to whether an appropriate amount
of .credit is given for each educational objective considered.
Is the evaluation for effort, growth, final
achievement?
Since the mark represents pupil progress
in terms of a·combination of objectives, there is uncertainty as to whether each objective within the combination is being properly weighted.
Faunce (22), Ebel
(16) and Spence (55) suggest philosophically that in the
issuing of grades one is dealing with value and not facts.
' At present it is difficult to judge just what is being
evaluated.
The responsibility of the instructor then is
to define for himself and for students what constitutes
competence.
To do this the development of educational
objectives is required that relates to the specific
learning involved·.
Following this, evaluative techniques
I
!
73
Psychologists and psychiatrists have noted the
undesirable effect upon the mental health of many children,
i
caused by evaluation and grading procedures in the public
schools.
1
1
Fred T. Wilhelms, (58) states that·many emotional
and maladjustment difficulties of students, difficulties
which counselors are often called upon to deal with, are
; caused by grades.
Albert Beck (7), Paul Edmonston (17)
·William Glasser (24, John Holt (28, Howard Kirschenbaum,
Sidney B. Simon, Rodney W. Napier (35), Abraham Maslow (41)
Ernest 0. Melby (42) and Carl Rogers (50) attest to .this.
Review of the Procedure
Selection of the Population
The selection of senior high art students was
appropriate for this study for the following reasons:
i
i
They--were not art -majors, and therefore might tend to be
.. _more anxiety prone in relation to their artist products
than art majors would be.
The student population repre-
sented diverse cultural backgrounds.
The ages of the
participants in the experiment ranged from fourteen to
nineteen years.
The senior high art classes are usually
74
r constructed of a
1,.
~'~apt~ve-~~~i-~~ce"
since they are one of
the various classes required for graduation.
It could
therefore be. assumed that these students would suffer more'
'II
. stress while working with art materials and using tech-
!
located in the Los Angeles area.
l and
Belmont High School
Birmingham High School were chosen primarily because
, of the heterogeneous mixture of the student population.
All procedures and steps used in the investigation
· were identically prepared and distributed to each of the
classroom instructors involved in the experiment.
Orienta-
tion discussions and demonstrations of the techniques
involved throughout the experiment were presented to all
participating instructors prior to their presentation to
each of their classes.
Instructional materials were
issued to each instructor.
Classification and Random Assignment of Students
into Experimental Groups
In order that random assignment of students to
specific conditions would result, the instructor by calling
the role on the specific day of the assignment asked each
student to draw a slip of paper out of an
envelope~
These
15
r---------~---·--··---·----------------·
--···----------------------·--------------
' slips of paper had been previously prepared with numbers
!.
i and were color coded. Ten of these ·slips of paper were
!
: coded with red dots, another ten had green dots, and the
• remaining ten contained yellow dots.
I
After-selecting the
slips of paper the student reported the color and the
number on the slip to the instructor.
The teacher then
recorded the information on the role sheet for further
use during the experiment.
Experimental Design
The experiment was designed to be administered in
three separate sections that were to be given on three
consecutive days.
On the first day The Lesson was taught
to-the class ;--in this the students actually learned the
techniques of using the brush to achieve a variety of
brush strokes.
The medium used was -water color paints.
On the second day the students were asked to practice the
techniques learned on the previous day; this part of the
experiment is referred to as The Exploratory.
The
-Assignment (actual student performance that was statistically analyzed) was performed on-the third and last day
of the experiment.
Emphasis was placed on the specific objects of the
art lesson which stressed the use of five or more varieties
76
r-------··-·---·-··-·--·--···- ------.
-· ·-- - -·-·
·-· ----···-· ---·-------·--····- -·-----·---------------------------1
§t~~k~ t~ehniq~ep,
along with the promotion of
I ove~ ... e!ll I!H~Jth~tic quality~
The specific principles of
!ot brY§h
i
i
;
'
j
l.
~ WH;!,.(L
~~
-~~=-
h
A~ch instructor in each class
w_e~te r- evl.·~~eA
.... w_c y b y .......
· involve~ in the
: City
exp~riment
were taken from the Los Angeles
Seh~~l Dist~ict S~nior
High Instructional Handbook
'
to~ Te~~he~~,
the
'
in§t~YetO~$
F~io~
~r@~@Ht@d
eedu~e
in
~elation
to the over·all aesthetic
to the assignment, written instructions were
tQ the instructors pertaining to specific pro-
that was to be
the students.
Afte~
P3ting in the
~~oup
principles of art were discussed by
Th~Je
us~d
this was done, each student partici-
~~periment
he belonged.
in the random distribution of
would know to which grading
There were three grading groups in-
volved, represented by three colors; green, yellow and
red.
The green eolor represented the group of students
. who would be allowed to grade their own work.
color
repres~nted
The yellow
the group that would be involved in
dyadic grading; a combination of student and teacher
evaluation.
The red eolor represented grading b.y the
teacher alone.
77
r··-··--------------··--···--·---·-------·-~-----------------------·-----------------------------l
I
i
Experimental Grading Groups
.j
Green Dot .•..•. 1/=1 Self grading group
II
Yellow Dot ..•.• 1/=2 Dyadic grading group
I
Red Dot •...•... 1/=3 Teacher only grading group
I
The total experiment lasted three days.
Ifirst
day The Lesson was taught.
I!
!I
On the
The second day involved
I The Exploration or the practice of the learned techniques.
I
! The
third day was the day of The Assignment.
The
I
J
I
1
students were asked to create a picture using their own
subject matter, but using the new techniques that were
taught to them.
When The Assignment was completed, each
I
I
I pupil
performed the grading procedure to which they had
[been randomly assigned.
l
j
Collection and Evaluation of the Data
Following the completion of The
l
'!i
Assignment~
the
I projects "~;vere then collected by the instructors. The
I work was matted in preparation for t:he evaluation process
l
I which was carried out by professional artist-teacher
· 1
I
i judges.
Throughout the evaluation procedure all student
I
II names and color groups were not revealed to the judges.
I This ">vas actually accomplished by simply assigning a
coded number to each student's work randomly placed
1
7_8
,----·--------~---·
---- ··-----·----- -------------------------
--- ----------------------------------------
-----·----
---~
1on the exhibition wall where they were evaluated.
The
1
i
i
!used by the judges.
l-
!numbers corresponded to those on the evaluation forms
i
The evaluation procedure used was somewhat identical
;to those presently employed by art teachers in many public
,school systems, i.e., letter grades of A,B,C,D, and F.
:Each grade was given a numerical value similar to those
:used in most schools, A=5, B=4, C=3, D=2 and F=l.
Of the eleven judges involved in the evaluation
procedure, seven were professional art educators and four
were graduates in the Masters of Arts Degree Program.
Prior to the evaluation by the judges, a
demonst~ation
of
the brush techniques, which had been taught by instructors
to the students, was again demonstrated to the judges in
order that they might become more familiar with the
various techniques they would be expected to evaluate.
The list of-the Principles of Art used in the Los Angeies
. City_ __~ch_ools _wc:ts___ a]_so giy-en to the_judges __so.. that they
might familiarize themselves with the material taught to
the
stu~ents
in relation to the assignment.
Xerox copies of the page in the role books used in
the Los Angeles City Public Schools, were handed to the
judge~
for their inspection.
79
;----· -----~-- ----······-··· --- ..... . ··-·. •... .
I
.
.
---··
····----- ·····-·--- ---··-····-···-"
···------···-----------,
Two different evaluation forms were used by the
!judges participating in the evaluation.
One form evalu-
: a ted· the variable involving the variety of five or more
! brush
techniques.
The second form involved .the judgment
of over-all aesthetic quality.
Results
The principle questions which this study attempted
to answer are stated in the form of the following null
·hypothesis:
1.
The mean score of completed art
products in the area of over-all
aesthetic quality will not be
significantly higher in the group
in which the grade is determined
·.
jointly by student and teacher as
------_,~...._ ..c.oiiipared with the group in which
only the teacher determines the
grade.
The mean score of completed art
products in the area of over-all
aesthetic quality, will not be
-~---·· significantly higher in the group
in which the grade is determined
--~ ... ,... .........._.... , -~---"Qy___the_ student alone as compared
with group in which only the
teacher determines the grade.
__
-~·····
·-
-~~-~..,-,_..,
2.
.~r.--· -~~~--
3.
The mean score of completed art
products in the area of five or
more brush techniques, will not
be significantly higher in the
group in which the grade is determined by student and teacher
as compared with tre group in
which only the teacher determines
!
80
.the grade.
4.
The mean score of completed art
products in the area of five or
more brush techniques, will not
be significantly higher in the
group in which the grade is determined by the students alone as
compared with the group in which
only the teacher determines the
grade.
Null Hypothesis
The mean score of completed art products in the
area of over-all aesthetic quality will not be significantly higher in the group in which the grade is determined.
A mean score for each student on both dimensions
was obtained.
Following this a two way analysis of
variance was performed for each dimension.
The results
of the art work of the three classrooms comprised the
·levels of the first dimension.· ·The three methods of
grade assignemnt comprised the second dimension.
It was found that all three methods of grading
of the art products were essentially alike in terms of
.the dimensions evaluated.
There appeared to be a trend
towards the teacher only grading method to produce lower
scores than the two techniques in which the stuqent was
involved in the grading venture.
.
The null hypothesis
was not refuted because of the lack of significant
J
l
<
81
r--,·~-"-·-·-····~-·r···--··----··
··~---··
··------·--·---
··-·-><
r•u-
·-···
! statistical evidence on all dimensions tested.
I
The
analysis for the above variables failed to prove significant F values at either the 5 or 1 percent levels of
confidence.
Therefore it was not possible to disprove
the null hypothesis.
Even though the final results of the investigation
seemed to lean toward a predicted direction,the final
data failed to approach statistical significance.
This
may have. been due to several factors or variables.
The
following questions might be pondered:
perhaps the
study was conducted over too short a time period.
the assignment should have been longer.
geneous population have the same results?
Maybe
Would a homoWould a larger
sampling effect the results?
One cannot overlook the fact that the observed
equivalency of performance is invariant over grading
procedures in senior high art classes where the population
of students usually consists of a captive audience as the
individuals are not interested in art and are extremely
threat~ned
by their artistic output.
system that ranks their work?
and progress only?
Why use a grading
Should we evaluate growth
Perhaps a pass-fail or credi't-no
credit would be more advantageous.
R. D. Strom states
I'.
82
~--~---~
--
-~~::.--~~--·- --~·-
.....
-~~·
---
-----------~----
----
-· --· ----·"·----··· -·
~- -~-· ~--- ~
-·····-
----···--··"·-·--------~~-~---
ithat:
i
i
When students must view grades as an
index of their work-product rank in
relation to their fellow students
rather than as rough indices to denote
whether they are progressing in their
course, it is natural that pursuit of
grades will come to occupy a prime
position, while learning itself is
secondary. As a result, scholarship
is dealt a severe blow and overly
strong attitudes of rivalry and competition are set up. (56)
I
!
It is evident that in the opinion of Glasser
(20.21), Beck (7), Mead (2), Holt (28), Maslow (41), and
Rogers (50), external evaluation and grading hinders
rather than encourages learning.
The results of the present study indicate that the
dyadic system of grading (Group #2), with both instructor
and student arriving at a final evaluation mutually is the
most effective method for the stability of the student.
It assists the young person in his ability to be selfevaluative.
Roland Faunce and Carroll L. Munshaw state:
Whether or not such self-evaluations are
translated into school marks, they contribute significantly to the education
of the student. It is probable that
self-evaluation is much more important
and significant an activity than is
teacher-appraisal~
Only through selfevaluation can a student gain control
of the crucial business of setting
standards for himself •.
83
~~·
.I
...
•-'•"•"~ ·-~····---·--
---·-·-··• • -·•-· ••--' •- • - •• ••• •• • '~-
•••-•~•
-
••
--~·-•••••-•·~·-•••n-or<••-••••-~~-·-·-~---------------~
i
4nd only established standards have
Bny m~~ning in education. Teachers
I
§hould work systematically on methods
of helping students assess their own
vrogre~~.
(22)
I
i
Ahm~nn gftd ~lock
tot~l ev~lu~tion p~ogram
:ftnd
mo~e i~
'
lMg;rg~~et
:of
th~ ne~d
!
(1) state that the aspect of the
that is being emphasized more
for pupils to evaluate themselves.
Neg.d (2) e.lso suggests that the dyadic system
ev~luetion
If the
Allowed to be
would be preferable.
~tudent
performing an art lesson is to be
s~lf~evaluative,
he must have a specific
. §et of objectives related to the specific assignment.
·These will be of great assistance in guiding him.throughout the work.
~tudent
may take his work to the instructor and then ex-
pl€J.i'fl where
h3~
been
ye~rs,
When the assignment is completed the
~nd
how the objectives were used.
utili~ed
All
gr~de.s
This method
successfully by the author for three
are compiled by each student in con-
_:sultation with the-instructor.
Consequently, there is no
competitive atmosphere in the classroom as everybody works
at thej..r own level and speed within the boundaries.of the
objeetive5J!,
As Loui~ J. Karmel has suggested (32) in his- book,
Measurement and Evaluation in the Schools, that grades are
84
..
Iwith us,
r·""-~-.-- ~-~---~---~---
. --~----· ..
~-- ~--~
.. .. ---. ------- ..... ·-···-···
~
····-· -~-····· - .. "'--·-·- _... ~---~------··--~--~-- - - - - - - - - - - - ' " ·
like it or not, and it is the job of each teacher
j
I to
make them as effective as possibl·e.
The teacher who
I
!
· is against grades in the classroom can place more emphasis
on the rewards of learning and less on the importance of
: grades.
Suggestions for Further Study
1.
There should be additional research in
area of dyadic grading.
2.
A study similar to this experiment might be
conducted using larger homogeneous group ings of students.
3.
A similar type study might be extended
over a longer period of time and include a larger sampling of students.
4.
Significant research might be developed
in the area of evaluating the progress
and growth of the student in art rather
than group comparison.
5.
Additional investigation might he carried
out which deals with the differences of
grading as related to intrinsic and extrinsic values of art to the student.
r-----·---- --.. . ·-· ·
----~·
l
I
BIBLIOGRAPHY
86
(~~··<.--.....~------- -~ .~- o P • - · ~d' · ~ - - - · · - · , --~---- · - -• .~· -~~--~------- --·~,------·--~··~--
~
j
!
BlBL!OGR.APHY
(l)
Ahm~nn, J ~ Stanley and Glock D. Marvan:
Evaluating !
i?uril ~!~!:l'l
Allyn and Bacon, Inc.
Boston 1963
p,. 545..-586
(2)
And~r~on,
(3)
A
r~yehology of the Cl:eative Eye.
University of
California Pres:s, Berkeley 196 7 p. 97
(4)
Al!'PJ~tine, Donald:
D~finit:ions in Art
Harold: Editor
Creativity and Its
Cultivation
"Creativity in Cross-cultural Per,
jiietiv;n-----Margaiet Mead, Harper and Row 1959 p. 257 '
A~nh~im,
Rudolf:
Art and Visual Perception
"Needed Research and the Role of
Education" National Art Education Association Journal
Volume 7 No. 1 Autum
196:5
=- .
-
-
.
m= . .
(5)
Bard, Be1:nard: "The Death of the Report Card"
L3dies Home Journal Oct. 1970 Vol. 87 p. 160-1
(6)
Beard, Evelyn:
------Art Education
"Change, Challenge and Art Teachers"
February 1967 p.30-31
Beck, Albert:
(i)
"Self·Evaluation, or How to Defang an
Edue€1-tional Albatrose" School Arts September 1970
p. 3Bp-39
(8)
Bradley, William R. "Intrinsic Feedback and Its
Effect Upon Aesthetic Growth" National Art Education
Association Volume 10 No. 2 Winter 1969
Sb-.
-~-~-~---
-~l
-A-&h-.
-USW
-(9)
Art
4#
Eduea~tion
~I¥-~-
· HWho Should Evaluate Students?"
No. 9 December 1969
p. 22-23
(10)
Brittain, Lambert: Creativity and Art Education
National Art Education Association Washington, D. C.
p. 23
(ll)
Brown, Donald J: AeEraisal Procedures in the Seconda~z Schools
Prentice Hall Inc. New Jersey 1971
p. 110-117
87
;---·--- ····-· ··----
-· ... -~
- ..
- .. ----·· .. .... ..
•-'
......... -··
--
..•
. - .. -. ·•··· .... . .. ·-- ...... ---
··--·····--~--····----···--·--------.
(12) Bruner, Jerome: Toward a Theory of Instruction
W. Norton Co., Inc. New York 1968
p.41
1
(13) Burckhart, Robert: Spontaneous and Deliberate Ways
of Learning
International Textbook Co. Scranton,
Pa. 1962
p. 49
(14) Burt, Cyril: "The Psychological Aspects of Aesthetic
Education" Art Education Volume 20 No. 3 March
1967
p. 26-27
(15) D'Amico, Victor: Creative Teaching in Art
national Textbook Co. Scranton, Pa. 1953
Interp. 2
(16) Ebel, Robert: Editor Encyclopedia of Educational
Research Fourth Edition MacMillan Co. New York
1960
p. 759-762
(17) Edmonston, Paul: "Conditions Which Enhance or
Inhibit Creative Teaching and Learning" Art Research
Education Issue Bulletin Volume 19 N.4
April 1962
p. 9-22
(18) Eisner, Elliot W.: Educating Artistic Vision
Stanford University Copy 1972 MacMillan Co.
(19)
School Arts
No. 1
(20)
Art Education
(21)
N.Y.
"Evaluating Children's Art"
September 1963
Volume 63
"The Challenge to Art Education"
February 1967
p. 27-28
Eisner, Elliot and Ecker, David: Readings in Art
Education Gim Blaisdell Co. Waltham, Mass. Copy
1966
p. 349
(22) Flaunce, Roland and Manshaw, C'arroll L.:
and Learning in Secondary Schools
Teaching
(23) Feldman, Edmund Burke: Becoming Human Through Art
Prentice Hall Inc., Englewood Cliffs, New ~ersey
Copyright 1970
p. 203
(24) Glasser, William, M.D.: Schools Without Failure
·Published Harper and Row, New York 1969
88
' ' - ' ' " " ~- . • ~ ..... __ ,. ~- •r-
;
·~• ~-~• ~-#---~~~-------<--&-•1•--~-A-~~--·---~
The Identity Society:
Harper
Row 1972
(26) Gowan, John; Demos, George; Torrance, E. Paul:
Editor~
Creativity: Its Educational Implications
John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York 1967
p. 132
(27) Hastie, W. Reid: Editor Art Education: The sixty
Four Yearbook of the National Society for the Study
of Education. Part II University of Chicago Press
Chicago, Ill.
p. 84-86
(28) Holt, John: How Children Fail
New York 1964
p. 50,76
Dell Publishers
(29) Hubbard, Guy: Art in the High School Wadsworth
p. 47,
Pub • Co • Inc. , Belmont, California 1967
164
(30) Johnson, Pauline B.: "Happenings and Things to Corne"
Art Education
Volume 22 No. 9
December 1967
p. 25-27
(31) Kaelin, Eugene: "Are Behaviorial Objectives Consistent with Social Goals of.Education?"
Art
Education Volume 22 No. 8
November 1969
p. 7
(32) Karmel, Louis J.: Measurement and Evaluation in the
Schools
MacMillan Co. New York 1970, p. 417-424.
(33) Kaufman, Irving: Art and Education in Contemporary
Culture
MacMillan Company New York 1966
p. 27,
33, 35, 44, 48
(34)_ .Keiler:. The Ar.t in Teaching Art
University of
Nebraska Press
Lincoln, Neb. 1961
(35) Kirschenbaum, Howard; Simon, B. Sidney; Napier,
Rodney W.: Wad-Ja-Get? The Grading Game in
American Education
Hart Publishing Co., Inc.
New York City 1971
p.47-71
'
(36) Lanier, Vincent: Teaching
Secondary Art
International Textbooks in Art Education
Italo De
Francesco; Scranton, Pa. 1966
p. 69,139
I
. I
89
--------------·- -----· .-- _______, _____ ·--·-- ---· -. -·- -·. ---- ·- - . ---·' ... _. --------------- --- . . ----------·-·:::-------·1
[ (37) L.ow~~.f~l,d, Viktor and· Brittain, Lambert, W.;
!
1
I
Cr~~!iv~ and Mental Growth 4th Ed. Macmillan Co.
1
New York 1967 p. 252-286, 401-402
I
i
! (38) Luca, M~rk and Kent, Robert: ttstrategies of Teaching
A.t=t Education" Modern Elementary and Methods Series
Frentiee Hall 1968 Englewood, Cliffs, New Jersey
p, 26
(39)
~chool
! (40)
(41)
Max s.: "TheMeasure of Accomplishment"
p. 21,22
and_Society January 1969
M~t=~hall,
Teaching Without Grades
Oregon State Univ. Press 1968 p.60-67
M3~low,
Ha~pe~
Abraham H.:
and Row 1970
Motivation and Personality
p. 170, 234-235
(42) Melby, Ernest 0.:
"Its Time for Schools to Abolish
the Marking System" Contemporary Issues in Educational Psychology
p. 422-425 .
(43) Neperud, Ronald:
~rt. E~ucation
"Changing Concepts in Teaching Art"
20; 15-20 June 1967
p. 15-19
(44) Odell, C.W.: High School Marking Systems
Review Vol. 33 1928
p. 346-354
School
(45) Popham, W. James: "The Teacher Empiricist" A
-Curriculum and Instructional Supplement Aegus Publishing- Company
(46) Read, Herbert: The Meaning of Art
Baltimore, Maryland 1963
(47)
New York
Pelican Books
Art and Allienation
1970
p. 26
Viking
(48) Reed, Carl:
Early Adolescent Art Education
Charles
A. Bennett Company Inc. Peoria, Illinois 1957
p. 191 ... 194
(49)
Rhoad~s,
Walter M.: Contemporary Issues in Educational Psychology "Its Time for Schools to Abolish
·the Marking System" Clagio, Allen and Bacon, Inc.
Boston 1970
90
r------- --------· ---------· ··- --·- -·-- .. ·-- . ----·--:_-...-- ...... -- -·- . ··:·· . ·_- ·: -.-·:·-··· .... -·------·
! (~0) l§~@j:§, C~1=l~ Tow~~d
~ Theol=y of·c~~ativity
• - - .• ::Tr=
... - -~-:
-------------------------------------~
ivity ttnd it~ Cult1V€ltl~P19~f p, 69, 82
I
I
l
: (~1)
J{y~h,
G. M,:
_The
N~w
Ob._j_7et~_ve$ Q'r
'ioJ:k
11 C1=~~t,..
H~J:}?~~ ~nd
Rgw
New ... 'J'yp~ Examination
Univ, ~f C~lifo~ni~ Scott, f~riman
Chicg~o 1929
p. ~6Sh·376
•
i
I.
€lnd-Company
i
i (~2)
!
.
fH,.lb~I-'m~m, Ch~~le~:
JJQy~g.,
Ng.w '¥9~k
C'r;i.~i~ in the Cla$~n:oom
197'0
p. 13-8, 346 --=--
R~nd001,
I
(~~) ~ilv~;t;IDan, R9n~ld;
''Wh~t R~~e~'reh Tell~ U~ Ab9ut
Motivlltion in Stud~nt~ f91= A~t Activity" A~t
Edyea.t~on
Vol, 24 No. 5 Mey 1971 p.
z·r-
(~4)
~mellw~od, Mg~y H.;
Examination$ and Grading
~Y§temf3
"An Hi~ tgric9-l1y- ·s·t-udy. -of- Examinat:fons
-(';-~gg1-ng
~.
s:Y~tem~ J.,.n
.
How~n:d
Univ.
E
f
_at"_y
f~f;$~
1935
A-m
-.
~11er1ean
Ma$$,
u.
. .
.nl.vel:sJ-t~es.
and
"
p, 75, 85
Ralph B.:
Improvement of Marking Systems
c{>lumbie Union Conti"ibut:Ions- to --E'duc-itfonal s·~rf~~
$~@nee,
Cqlumbia
p,
(~6)
64~71
Strt1m, R.D,:
Jou~ngl
___
Univ~~~ity
.
rublieatigns
t92i
N~w.Yo~k
"Aeadf;)}mie Aehiev~m~mt ~nd Mental H~altlt'
of $eeondg,ey
Edue~tion
39
1964
349
·(58) Wise, Jg,w.es F.; "Technique~ fg~ Assessing Growth in
Ae~ tl'u:~tie EvallJg.tiem" AJ;t Education 21;
26 .,.7
~---
______January 1968
p. 26-27" ·
--
91
. -----.. ·-----.. . -
r·-~·-·-----~-
!i
APPENDIX A
Forms and Instructional Booklet to Teachers
..''·•
92
r------·---------------···- ------ ·-· ------- ----
-----~---
-:-·
I
l
t
INSTRUCTIONAL BOOK TO
TEACHERS
Involved in the Experiment on
ARTISTIC PERFORMANCE IN SENIOR HIGH ART STUDENTS
AS A FUNCTION OF GRADING METHOD
93
- - - ---------·---
---··~~·
RATER COLOR
PA1NTING--~VARIETIES
THE
I
OF BRUSH TECHNIQUES
i
I
I.
LESSON
I
1.
TEACHER'S INSTRUCTION TO C.LASS REGARDING PREPARATION
OF MATERIALS
1.
Wet (puddle) the black color and two
other colors.
2·.
Don' t worry about m.i stakes ; just continue with the class and try not to fall
behind. You will be able to practice
later (or tomorrow).
3.
Hold the_ paper vertically and fold it in
half three times; this will give eight
separate sections to work in (show paper).
4.
Put your name on the back of this paper,
at the bottom
i
1
instructor.
TEACHER'S INSTRUCTIONS TO CLASS REGARDING LESSON
(These instructions should be read, beginning with the
first, one at a time:·· After each instruction is given,
_.be sure _to allow _plenty of. time for the . performance.
·.
/
Instructor should be circulating among the student
to.offer assistance and demonstrate if necessa!y).
Go on to the next instructions only when all of the
students seem ready.
LESSO;N:
I
I
ij·
__ 5 ·---~.Jl papers will be collected by the
2.
!'
'
94
uwe are going to have a lesson on the calligraphic
r
I use
I .
of the brush; now wet your brushes and .•.•.
1.
Dip the brush in the black paint and USING ONLY
TIP perform a series of thin, short, horizontal
and perpendicular lines. Try to make each line
similar in size and width (thin). If you are
doing this correctly, the lines should be very
THIN. Practice doing this.on the first line
of the paper.
2·.
On the second line, repeat the perpendicular
and horizontal short strokes, but now by
pressing down hard on the paper, while the
brush is loaded with paint, you will achieve
wide lines.
· 3.
On the third line, combine the thick and thin
strokes. To do this, do not remove the brush
from the page while making this combination;
but this should be executed in one stroke.
4.
Combine two colors on the brush. This is
.accomplished by putting the side of the brush
in one color, and the other side of the brush
in another color. Then use the #3 technique
and invent flowers, fish, birds, always remembering to use as little detail as possible.
5.
On line five, do the #4 lesson, but allow the
brush to run dry--this gives the dry brush
technique.
-----6. · ··-Di-p- the brush in the water and get it wet--
then dip only the tip of the brush into the
... Make_ a series of flowers. This
will give a variety of values.
"b~l~_C!k paint~
7.
Repeat lines one to six on a wet sheet of
paper to achieve a wet-on-wet effect (use other
side of paper, or a new sheet).
.95
r·--------,--
.
---~·--·
.. ------· -------------------------------------
!On the following the finish of the above lesson, the
I
j•
i
!children should be given another sheet of paper and given
the EXPLORATORY.
The instructor should again review the
PRINCIPLES OF ART with the class.
THE EXPLORATORY
:INSTRUCTIONS TO THE STUDENTS.
"We are going to practice the techniques learned
yesterday---use only the new techniques that we learned
.. yes_terday and create a series of fish, flowers, plants,
animals, birds, etc.
Try to eliminate detail, as this
will give you a more successful result."
(This Exploratory should not take more
than one period)
THE ASSIGNMENT:
PREPARATION
It is very important that the instructor follow
these directions explicitely.
1.
Open the sealed envelope, and call role.
2. -When the student replies here' have him
come up and choose one of the slips of
paper which is enclosed in the envelope.
·3.
4.
The instructor should inquire what number
is on the slip of paper that the student
chose.
Instructor then records this number -onto the
I
I.
I
96
,,_>•'"-·~-----·---··---·----···-·-··-·-·-···-··-------·--·-·-·----··---------------1
enclosed form for the role call, next to
the corresponding number of the B form
5. The instructor will then give the student
the- pape~with the proper number on it, that
is to be used for the assignment.
· INSTRUCTOR ANNOUNCES TO CLASS:
"For this assignment I am
· hoping to find out if specific grading practices actually
affects the work" ••• then he places the enclosed grading
card on the board and reads it to the class to reaf-firm
the meaning of the colored dots at the bottom of the
student's papers.
This will inform them regarding the
grading group they are in.
The card is left in view of
the class until the assignment is over.
After the above is finished, (the whole process should not
take any more than ten minutes), the instructor may then
proceed with the assignment.
THE ASSIGNMENT
TEACHER'S INSTRUCTIONS TO THE CLASS:
"Create a picture using your own choice of subject
matter; as landscape, seascape, undersea life, etc ••• using
the new technique that you have been learning.
The
greater variety of techniques used while you are keeping
the Principles of Art in mind, will give you a beautiful
I
97
~f'"ll§Yu~-;;-------------:------
!
g§§[email protected]
"Thi§
i§
d.Y~
finished by the end of
II J)@:fi-t'>=
· a t- dgl;_Y
- ".
~--
t:l
.
~
I
I
"Th~ th~e~ ~~t;)Y1;H3
will be
~valuated
in relation to
i
i
IA~higvin~ th.@§@ §fl§~ifi~ ~bj@~tives."
I
lO~JECTIVE~~
l,
U§@ ~ v~~i~ty
z,
f~int
1
(The
of one or more of
th~§e te~hnique~.
the
pi~ty~e
in the most
b@~Ytiful ano ~~eative way you
Xftt;)W how t9 do (aesthetic value).
§P~lo~ed li~t
of
O~J~CTIVES--should
'be vut in full view 9t the class)
not
FOR T~AC~ERS REGARDING EVALUATION PROCEDURES:
. (gt the fini§h of th§ l~~~on)
iN~TRUCTlON$
e~ll the student's names who have the red dot
li~tgo l:>y the:i.'!=' n?me, and have them hand their
pgpe~s j_n.
lf yo~ wish to grade them, please
§Q on the ba~k
the paper--close to the
1.
do
ot
ft§ID§.
f§ll th@
~'
-
~tudent~
who have the green dot on
their papers, to put the grade they think they
to the g~e€m dot.
·qe§l~rve- -r1ext
with a yellow dot on his paper
~hould be called individually up to the
te~eh~r'~ de~k to discuss the grade.
The
child $hould be asked to count the values-ft@ ~hould be a~~ed if he is satisfied with
~--the 1='e~ul.t$, g.nd -rel.g.te them to the princi~1@~ of g~t.
Th@ft a ~+ade will be agreed
upon to the mutual ~atisfaction of both teacher
il'Hi §tudent.
3_.~ ____ Eacl],___~_t:ude!lt
I
I
98
~- If
I for
t
the
instru~tor
finds that he needs an extra day
the assignment, the papers should be collected and.
distributed on the following day by the instructor.
I
When the assignment is finished, please call me at
I
!
344·2039, in the evening---or at 628-5101 in the daytime
1
I
and leave a message to be placed in my box at Belmont
I High
School.
AGAIN: PLEASE KEEP ALL WORK DONE BY THE STUDENTS
relating to this experiment.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR HELP!
1 will inform you of the statistical findings if
you are interested.
r·-------------··-···· ·------1
l
·-------~------
Env~l9tH~
~ootFJ.inin~
.
--·---------·---·-·---------
§lip§ 9f e{)l9f' e{)d~Hi JHlJ'>~I:" ~L ~.,
1
( R~d,
Y~ll9w
gnd
G~~~n,
.
190
r---·--------·····------·----···-·-------.--·--·--1 qolor coded and numbered paper for student's use for
!
The Assignment.
Thirty sheets were supplied to each
instructor •.
-
--•
.
-
24
®
25
0
26
101
---- ----·-------·--These Principles of Art were reviewed for the
r------------------~--·'
1
;
;
!
! students throughout the experiment.
This section was
also given to the judges as a review in order that they
would be aware of what the students had been exposed to.
; PRINCIPLES ART
BAlANCE
Balance is the arrangement
of art elements to produce a
visual equilibrium.
DOMINANCE
- Dominance is the emphasis of
one part over the other. Subordination of other parts results. Also called, Point of
Interest.
RHYTHM
- Rhythm is a repetition of .
elements providing progressive
and/or related movement.
CONTRAST
--- -TRANSITION
Contrast occurs when a color is
intensified by placing it near
its complementary color.
Extreme gradations of dark and
light values also achieve contrast. Also known as Visual
Tension.
T-ransition is a unifying movement
that carries the eye from one
element to another.
I
I!
,---·- ·-·--------·----------
! ~Fe@in~
102
--- ------ --··:··---------------------
Chart Placed on Board in Front of Class to
D@~§¥!Pe
the Meaning of the Color Broups.
I
SELF GRADING
GREEN
0
YELLOW
TEACHER AND STUDENT
GRADING COMBINED
RED
T'EACHER GRADING
103
!.
I
OBJECTIVES
I.
II.
Use a variety of five or more
brush techniques you have just
learned.
Paint the picture in the most
most beautiful and creative
way that you know how to.
.
r~
~-~~---~~~·--···-,_.·--·--
..
-~----·~-·~·----,.~-~
.
-~--·-----·-·----·-----~--~r-
II
1
.....---·--·1
·
II
i
I
II
I
I
.I
I
l
I
l
l
I
I
II
i
i
I
I
I
I
I
l
I
i
;
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
i
;._,.
APPENDIX
B
Evaluation and Data Forms
105
FTIO~
I
TAKEN
~FR-O~ LOS
ANGELES CITY SCHOOLS ROLE BOOK
I
Used as a guide for evaluation of the experi-
I
I
I
ment by the judges •
The specific areas of· attention
are marked with the asterisk.
i
I
I!
I
I
i
I
I
I
,
f..
j
T
i
These criteria are based dna point of'reference which encompasses the entire group enrolled in a given
subject at a given grade level. Thus, the standard for a classroom group is established with reference
to that group of whi¢h tha~ class is a part.
i
. I
SUBJECT ACHIEVEMENT
-¥
• Quality
of
Work
Al
B
c
F
D
Quantity
of
Work
Does ;all a~signed work plus some
extra work, both
teacher-suggested and selfinitiated.
Interpretation
and
Application
learns facts and
principles, and
applies th~m to
new and un~amiliar
situations
Shows above \
1
average abili ty
to retain and.
apply facts and
principles.
Shows average ability
to retain and
apply facts
and principles.
Retains and
applies only a
few facts and
principles.
Shows little or
no progress toward applying
facts and principles.
Shows creativity,
high ability, initiative, and
originalty in
attacking and
thinking through
problems and arriving at logical
conclusions.
Does some independent work,
showing initiative and originality.
Shows average reasoning
ability and
some originality and
initiative.
Shows very
little reasoning ability,
originality and
initiative.
Seldom or never
shows reasoning
ability, originality, or
initiative.
l
l
I
1
•
*
'
Ma~ters funda~erttals thoro-
Meets class
· standards;
ughly; usually
shows satisfactory grasp
exceeds class
standards on
of fundamental skills
daily work,
tests, and
with average
marks on
other assignclass tests.
ments.
Does assignDoes all
assigned work
ed work;
plus some extra usually makes
up work
work; usually
teacher-suggest- missed.
ed.
P,roduces ~rkedly
superior wotk
and has consistently high
marks on class
tests.
Originality,
Initiative
and
.Reasoning
Has below average
performance in
classwork and on
tests and below
average growth
in understanding
of subjects.
Does substantially
less than average amount of
work and usually
does not make up
work missed.
Has "Fail" record
on classwork and
tests;.makes littl~
progress toward
learning basic
.
subject skills.
I
D?e~
not
m~n~mum
com~lete
requ~re-
.
·
1
ments, seldom or I
never doing assig1-j ·
ed work or class ,1
tests.
1
I.
106
fiCTURE NUMBER
11
l2
I
I~
l4
I·5
l
l6
I.
I
i7
i
i8
;'
'9
10
'1 1
12
'1 3
14
15
16
.1 7
18
11 9
'2 0
'2 1
22
23
24
25
G~D_E________N_am--'--e~~~~=======~
5
4
A
B
3
c
2
1
D
F
Occupation_ _ _ _ _ _ I
Length of Time
Age
-------
Sex
107
----------
:::::::A~:E:VAL:::::N
5
4
A
B
I
BY JUDGES-FIVE OR MO~ TECHNIQUES
3
c
2
D
1
F
Name
1
1
2
Length r.>f t:'im~=----
3
Age
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
-1 9
20
21
22
23
24
25
-----
I
s~~'====------
.108
,------------~---'---,--·----------
l. I
ROLE SHEET----ISSUED TO EACH OF THE INSTRUCTORS
. • I
STUDENTS
NAMES
GROUPS A, i
B OR C
!
COLOR.
CODE
R
y
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
G
9
R
y
G
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
K
Z:J
y
26
G
R
27
28
y
l.':J
R
y
G
R
y
G
G
R
y
G
R
y
G
R
y
G
R
y
G
determines
gradd.ng
'
method
"STUDENT NUMBERS ISSUED"
. 30
---·----
--
---- -·-
·-
-