The Problem The Problem Context of the problem I teach an art course for elementary pre-service education students that are intended to provide the basis for generalist K-8 teachers to teach and employ the visual arts in their curriculum in meaningful and substantive ways. I teach this class in two very different formats during the normal semester we meet for 15 weeks, twice a week for 1.75 hours and outside work of 2-5 hours a week. Twice a year I teach this course in a 3 week intensive session. The class meets four hours a day with 4-6 hours a day outside work expected. These classes are not identical in terms of how they are taught but most significantly different is the level of immersion that the one class has over the other. In both classes my goals include changing student's affective beliefs about art and providing an understanding about the content of what and how to teach about art to students. In both scenarios students incorrect or distorted beliefs about the value/nature of art can and often does prevent them from absorbing, learning and experiencing the material of the course. If they do not have a reasonable experience/relationship with art and art making then it is likely they will not understand the material nor will they be able to bring a meaningful understanding of visual art to students. In terms of how this looks in classroom practice this generally looks like the "child art" of stereotypical holiday pumpkins or "outlined" hands that create Thanksgiving turkeys instead of a host of meaningful explorations of ideas and materials used by humans to communicate visually. This immersion anecdotally seems to impact students in the 3 week course so that they emerge with a greater understanding regarding the value of the visual arts in student’s lives. The immersion changes their experience of the course and how they encounter the content. Students find ownership in their own work, art making, and learning and seem to value the arts in a whole new way. This sometimes happens to lesser degree in my 15 week course. Here students never spend more than an hour or two on any art making or the problem solving and challenge that goes into art. Their outside lives aren't focused on one class and they work and have significant lives around which they do their course work. The 15 week course also allows for longer periods of time to reflect on their own learning and to absorb the "content" of the course but they don’t get the immersion. The Problem: I really want to know what is learned in each of these different formats and which is most effective for learning. On the one hand students respond better to the 3 week format, reporting the immersion changes their lives. Most of the have never experienced that kind of intense experience before. On the other the short time period doesn't necessarily allow for the type of reflection and learning over time that seems to occur in the 15 week course. 3/5/2008

Preliminary Findings, Results, Conclusions, & Implications This box in in progress.

Project Summary In this project I will collect similar data from two classes. Due to the different timef rames these classes are taught differently but the content, goals and objectives are the same. In each course students will be asked to take an online survey which includes questions from a beliefs inventory used some ago with elementary pre-service students as well as questions the came from themes I found in my prior SoTL project which asked what engages and what are they learning. This questionnaire really is intended to get at the beliefs and preconceptions students have about art education. In both classes one final exam and one final reflection assignment will serve as data. Planned timeline completed-- Fall 2007: planned the project. Found Eisner's Belief inventory. Found some literature about the question. More is needed. Fall 2007: Generated otther survey questions surrounding themes that emerged in my 2005-2006 study about my course. That study surrounded a "what is" question and generated general themes that will be used in this survey. Nov. 2007: Completed human studies permissions. Recieved a small grant to help me hire student worker in the Spring for assistance in data analysis. December 2007—complete beliefs inventory--put online January 2008: Teach 2 week session. Do pre and post surveys, collect other data including: art work, exit tickets, exams, and final reflections. January--end of month start Spring 15 week course. Do pre surveys, collect other data thoughout the semester. Still working,,, February/March: students work with pre/post survey data, Jen does focus interviews, all work for more literature. Course continues. March to May 2008: collect data, work on literature finding and analysis of Winterim data April 2008: last group meeting with Fellows. May 2008: post surveys with Spring class Mary-June 2008—analysis of data, comparison of groups. Create a poster for August. Create a body of art work surrounding both the study and the results and findings of the study. 3/4/2008

What resources / references have you found helpful? Anderson, Tom. "How and why we make art, with implications for Art Education." Arts Education Policy Review 105.5 May/June 2004: 31-38. Bass, Randy. "The Scholarship of Teaching and Learning: What’s the problem?" Invention: Creative Thinking about Learning and Teaching. Feb. 1999: 9 pages. Accessed 5/2007: http://www.doit.gmu.edu/archives/feb98/randybass.htm Beudert, Lynn. "Work, pedagogy and change: Foundations for the art teacher educator." Virginia: NAEA, 2007. Brookfield, Stephen D. "Becoming a critically reflective teacher." San Francisco, Jossey-Bass, 1995. Burton, Judith. "The configuration of meaning: Learner-Centered Art Education revisited." Studies in Art Education 41.4 Summer 2000: 330-345. Glaser, B.G. & Strauss, A.L."The discovery of grounded theory. Strategies for qualitative research." Chicago: Aldine Publishing Company, 1967. Grauer, Kit. "Beliefs of preservice teachers toward art education."Studies in Art Education Summer 1998: 350-370. Gleeson, Peggy Blake, PT., Ph.D. 2003. Managing and motivating the generations. PDF file from Matrix Rehabilitation conference, Tampa Florida, Feb 12-16th 2003. http://www.uwsp.edu/education/facets/links_resources/4413.pdf 11 pages. Hatfield, Cynthia & Montana, Valerie & Deffebnbaugh, Cara. "Artist/Art educator: Making sense of identity issues." Art Education May (2006): 42-47. McKean, Barbara. "Concerns and considerations for teacher development in the arts." Arts Education Policy Review March/April 2001: 27-32. Nelson, Craig. Alternatives to Blaming. Paper from University of Wisconsin OPID Faculty College, Richland Center, Wisconsin, May 29,-June 1st 2007. Pajares, Frank M."Teachers beliefs and educational research: Cleaning up the messy construct." Review of Educational Research Fall (1992):307-332. Purnell, Paula G. "Fostering positive dialogue between arts specialists and classroom teachers." Teaching Artist Journal 3.4 (2005): 254-260. Ryken, Amy E."A spider and a fly in a web: seeing myself in the details of praxis." Reflective Practice February: (2004) 111-122. Shulman, Lee. "Making Differences: A Table of Learning." The Carnegie Foundation for the advancement of Teaching 2006: 11 pages. Accessed 5/2007 http://www.carnegiefoundation.org/publications/sub.asp?key=452&subkey=612 Stuart, Carolyn and Thurlow, Deborah. "Making it their own: Preservice Teachers' experiences, beliefs, and classroom practice." Journal of Teacher Education March/April 2000: 113-121. Wiggins, Grant, and McTighe, Jay. Understanding by Design 2nd Edition. Alexandria: ASCD, 2005. Yero, Judith Lloyd. "Beliefs" Teachers Mind Resources accessed July 2007: http://www.teacherMind.com.

Methodologies & Types of Evidence of Student Learning Gathered This is a primarily qualitative study though some descriptive statistics will be employed. Project Summary—In this project I will collect similar data from two classes. Due to the different time frames these classes are taught differently. In each course students will be asked to take an online survey which includes questions from a beliefs inventory used some ago with elementary pre-service students as well as questions the came from themes I found in my prior SoTL project which asked what engages and what are they learning. This lickert questionnaire is intended to get at the beliefs and preconceptions students have about art education. One component of the survey uses questions from Elliot Eisners Belief Inventory to understand whether or not students change in their beliefs about how they view the subject of art education--as a emotional experience or more in a disciplinary way. Additional components of the survey are directed towards understanding students beliefs and knowledge change about waht art is, the value of art, making art, teaching art, creativity, and some general student beliefs about education. Descriptive analysis of the data will be generated to see if change more or less prominant in the longer or shorter course formats. Additional data will be collected to do some triangulation as needed. This will include qualitative data such as focus group interviews, final reflection papers, and exit tickets. Most of these can be analized using grounded theory type text analysis and searching for patterns. Though it is still unclear if content acquisition is measurable in this course the final exam, also essay may be used to understand if substantive learning seems to have occured. 3/4/2008

Career Relevance & Impact As you work through the WTF or WTS Program, note any observations about the relevance and impact of the Program on your career (conducting your SoTL project, participating in specific WTF/WTS activities, working with UWS colleagues, etc.). This section is part of OPID's collection of testimonials about its signature faculty development Programs. Ongoing