THE ARTS AND EDUCATION NEW OPPORTUNITIES … ARTS AND EDUCATION: NEW OPPORTUNITIES FOR RESEARCH Arts...

THE ARTS AND EDUCATION: NEW OPPORTUNITIES FOR RESEARCH

Arts Education

Partnership2004

47243-CCSSO-AEP4.qxd 4/14/04 9:50 AM Page C1

Copyright © 2004 Arts Education Partnership

The Arts Education Partnership is administered by the Council of Chief State School Officers and theNational Assembly of State Arts Agencies, through a cooperative agreement with the National Endowment

for the Arts and the U.S. Department of Education. The Arts Education Partnership can be contacted at:

Arts Education PartnershipOne Massachusetts Avenue, NW, Suite 700

Washington, DC 20001-1431http://www.aep-arts.org

Permission to copy, disseminate, or to otherwise use information from this document is granted as long as appropriate acknowledgment is given.

This document is published in electronic format on the World Wide Web at www.aep-arts.org. For information on ordering printed copies, please call 202.336.7016 or visit www.aep-arts.org.

ArtsEducation

Partnership


THE ARTS AND EDUCATION: NEW OPPORTUNITIES FOR RESEARCH

Arts Education

Partnership2004

47243-CCSSO-AEP4.qxd 4/14/04 9:50 AM Page i

TASK FORCE

CHAIR: Gerald E. Sroufe, American Educational Research Association

John D. Bransford, University of Washington

James S. Catterall, University of California at Los Angeles

Richard J. Deasy, Arts Education Partnership

Paul D. Goren, The Spencer Foundation

Ann E. Harman, Harman & Associates, LLC

Doug Herbert, National Endowment for the Arts

Felice J. Levine, American Educational Research Association

Steve Seidel, Harvard Project Zero

PROJECT DIRECTOR: Lauren Stevenson, Arts Education Partnership

RESEARCH ASSISTANT: Andrew Nelson, Arts Education Partnership

47243-CCSSO-AEP4.qxd 4/14/04 9:50 AM Page ii

FOREWORD

Our explicit goal for this report is to spark new conversations about research on artsand education. We also hope that the report will allow researchers from a wide rangeof disciplines to see opportunities for joining colleagues from arts and education instudying the complex learning and expressive processes of the arts; their implicationsfor the intellectual, personal, and social development of children and youth; and theirpotential role in our collective pursuit of educational and social goals. These opportu-nities arise out of extensive work recently conducted in the field of arts and educationresearch.

In 1995, the U. S. Department of Education (USDE) and the National Endowment for theArts (NEA) co-founded the Arts Education Partnership (AEP) to examine the role of thearts in public education and in the learning and development of young people. A firstcharge from the two agencies was to propose an agenda for research related to thesegoals. AEP responded by publishing Priorities for Arts Education Research in 1997, theproduct of a year of deliberations by a task force of arts and education researchers andpractitioners, drawing on and extending earlier agendas and data collection activitiesof the two federal agencies. Priorities urged research on the effects of the arts on chil-dren and young people and on the teaching and learning conditions that would yieldpositive effects. It also urged regular research that would reveal and analyze trends inthe status and condition of arts education in the 15,000 school districts and 91,000 pub-lic schools in the United States.

The federal agencies and private funders responded to the recommendations inPriorities. The GE Foundation (then the GE Fund) and the John D. and Catherine T.MacArthur Foundation, which had commissioned a number of studies of arts learningand its effects, supported AEP and the President’s Committee on the Arts and theHumanities in publishing seven of the studies in 2001 as Champions of Change: TheImpact of the Arts on Learning. The USDE and the NEA cooperated in funding aNational Center for Education Statistics survey of the status and condition of the artsin schools, released in 2002 as Arts Education in Public Elementary and SecondarySchools. They also joined to provide funding for AEP to commission a team of schol-ars to review existing research in arts education, and to produce a compendium sum-marizing and commenting on the strongest studies of the academic and social out-comes of arts learning. AEP published the compendium in 2002 as Critical Links:Learning in the Arts and Student Academic and Social Development.

The Arts and Education: New Opportunities for Research • i

47243-CCSSO-AEP4.qxd 4/14/04 9:50 AM Page i

Critical Links indicated that important cognitive and social processes and capacitiesare developed in arts learning experiences. It recommended that future studies pur-sue these indications more fully and intensively to increase knowledge about the spe-cific characteristics and outcomes of learning in individual or multiple art forms.Critical Links also invited research on the interrelationships of the capacities engagedin arts learning and the capacities engaged in other intellectual, personal, and socialpursuits.

Critical Links has attracted significant attention among arts and education researchers,practitioners, policymakers, and funders. AEP was deeply gratified that the AmericanEducational Research Association commented favorably on the compendium, callingit a “benchmark” for arts education research, and offered to chair a task force to pro-pose a new agenda for research on the arts building on the recommendations inCritical Links.

In the fall of 2002, a task force was convened comprising scholars in education and thearts: John D. Bransford, University of Washington; James S. Catterall, University ofCalifornia at Los Angeles; Richard J. Deasy, Arts Education Partnership; Paul D. Goren,Spencer Foundation; Ann E. Harman, Harman & Associates, LLC; Doug Herbert,National Endowment for the Arts; and Steve Seidel, Harvard Project Zero. AERAExecutive Director Felice J. Levine and Senior Advisor Gerald E. Sroufe, assisted byProject Director Lauren Stevenson (AEP) and Research Assistant Andrew Nelson(AEP), guided the task force’s deliberations over a fifteen-month period. This report isthe fruit of that work.

These deliberations also benefited from the thoughtful input of authors of essays inCritical Links: Terry L. Baker, Education Development Center, Inc.; Karen Bradley,University of Maryland, College Park; Robert Horowitz, Columbia University; and LarryScripp, New England Conservatory. A group of researchers from a variety of academ-ic disciplines provided response to drafts throughout the development of the agenda:Helen V. Bateman, University of the South; Linda Nathan, Boston Arts Academy; Gil G.Noam, Harvard Graduate School of Education; George W. Noblit, University of NorthCarolina at Chapel Hill; Miriam Raider-Roth, University at Albany, SUNY; Reed Stevens,University of Washington; Deborah Stipek, Stanford University; and Shari Tishman,Harvard Project Zero. We are grateful for their extensive and generous participation.We would also like to thank Kathleen Cushman for her assistance in editing the finaltext of this report.

—Richard J. Deasy Arts Education Partnership

ii • The Arts and Education: New Opportunities for Research

47243-CCSSO-AEP4.qxd 4/14/04 9:50 AM Page ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ForewordIntroductionSection I: Cognition and Expression

The Arts and Cognitive Development

The Interaction of Cognitive and Affective Processes in the Arts

Learning and Artistic Expression

The Arts and the Transfer of Learning

The Arts, Literacy, and Language

The Arts and Young Children

Section II: Social and Personal DevelopmentArts Learning and Self-Identity

Arts Learning, Persistence, and Resilience

Arts Learning and Social Skills

Section III: Teaching and Learning EnvironmentsPractices and Attitudes of Classroom Teachers

Student-Teacher Relationships and the Role of the Student in

Arts Learning Environments

The Arts and School Climate and Culture

Integrated and Interdisciplinary Arts Programs

New Technologies and Arts Learning

Partnerships Between Schools and Cultural Organizations

Professional Artists Teaching in Schools

Section IV: Community, Democracy, and Civil SocietyThe Arts and Group Learning

The Arts and Participation in a Democratic Society

The Arts and Special Student Populations

The Arts and Building Understanding Among Diverse Groups

Section V: The Status and Condition of Arts EducationStatus, Condition, and Financing of Arts Education

The Impact of Federal and State Policies on the Arts

International Comparisons of Arts Learning

A Concluding Comment from the Task Force: Moving the Agenda ForwardReferences

i13456789

101112131415

1617181920212223242526272829303133

The Arts and Education: New Opportunities for Research • iii

47243-CCSSO-AEP4.qxd 4/14/04 9:50 AM Page iii

iv • The Arts and Education: New Opportunities for Research

47243-CCSSO-AEP4.qxd 4/14/04 9:50 AM Page iv

INTRODUCTION

The research agenda for arts education presented in this report is a challenge toresearchers, foundation directors, and policymakers. It challenges us to go beyond tradi-tional educational research approaches applied to the arts to methods requiring a morecomplex understanding of learners and their environments, more robust researchdesigns, and new disciplinary and multidisciplinary perspectives. The challenge beforethe task force in producing the report has been to demonstrate our central belief that newresearch approaches will advance our understanding of the relationships between the artsand education, and even the basic learning processes themselves.

The intellectual stimulus for this report was the publication of Critical Links: Learning inthe Arts and Student Academic and Social Development (2002), conducted under theleadership of the Arts Education Partnership. As a compendium of the best arts educationresearch examining student intellectual and social development in the arts, Critical Linksdemonstrates not only the strength of the field but also the need and potential for futurestudy. Its essays point to limitations of traditional research approaches and, indirectly, tolimitations in the arts research infrastructure. Most important, an essay by James Catterallcalls attention to the discrepancy between new understandings of cognitive processesand traditional research in arts and education. Our report provides a research agenda thatbegins with contemporary understandings of cognitive and personal development andoffers an approach that we believe can move arts education research into the mainstreamof social science research.

The research agenda represented in the report is illustrative rather than imperative. Thereader will find no statements or recommendations typical of reports of blue-ribbon pan-els (e.g., “Increase investment in research in immunology”), but will find instead justifica-tions for additional arts education research on specific topics, commentaries about thestatus of existing research on those topics, and research-based suggestions for new stud-ies. Topics recommended for additional study are organized according to four well-estab-lished areas of concern for educational research: (1) cognition and expression; (2) per-sonal and social development; (3) community, democracy, and civil society; and (4) teach-ing and learning environments. The fifth and final set of agenda topics relates to data col-lection and analysis of the status and condition of arts education.

The procedures for developing the research agenda within these areas were collaborativeand inclusive. The task force began by identifying major research challenges and oppor-

The Arts and Education: New Opportunities for Research • 1

47243-CCSSO-AEP4.qxd 4/14/04 9:50 AM Page 1

tunities, listing specific topics, and—most important—identifying and engaging experts tofill in gaps and to critique the work as it developed. The process of deciding on agendaitems was iterative, beginning with a large list and refining it through a series of passes.Once we had a feasible list, we assigned “champions” to make the case for each poten-tial topic, with some champions coming from outside the panel. The next stage involvedcollective critiques of the statements and extensive rewriting of each. The final stepengaged knowledgeable outside readers not associated with the project to offer com-mentaries on the draft.

As the task force worked through the complexities of the issues we chose to address, weexperienced the heightened sense of apprehension that often accompanies a dawningappreciation of the magnitude of one’s presumptions. We know that others must bedrawn into our discussions to augment the breadth of understanding provided in thisreport. We are certain—even hopeful—that they will critique, elaborate, and extend ourwork. But we are comfortable that the report provides a window onto a fresh landscapeof arts education research and that it will serve as a provocation for new conversationsabout research in arts and education.

The agenda laid out in this report is addressed to scholars in arts and education, and toresearchers in other fields who are interested in the learning and development of childrenand youth, in the functioning of schools, and in learning in other environments. In recentarts education research referenced throughout this report, we have found indications ofmultiple roles and effects of the arts in these areas of interest as well as suggestions forfuture lines of inquiry. Those lines of inquiry align with the interests and concerns ofresearchers working in the cognitive and learning sciences, in neuroscience, in child andyouth development, in sociology, anthropology, economics, and other fields. Engagingthe theories, perspectives, and methods of these fields in tandem with those of arts andeducation will create valuable new understandings of the human activities engaged andembodied in the arts, and will offer insights and guidance on their relationships to thegoals of public education.

With this agenda, we also hope to engage education policymakers in a fresh conversa-tion about the contribution of arts education, in order to provide a more robust set ofschool reform strategies for achieving the nation’s educational goals. School reform ini-tiatives grounded in a full range of teaching, learning, and assessments are much morelikely to be successful than those based on narrow conceptions of the learning process.If researchers across the disciplines take up the challenges of this agenda, arts and edu-cation research could provide additional and even more compelling foundations for edu-cation reform.

—Gerald E. SroufeAmerican Educational Research Association

2 • The Arts and Education: New Opportunities for Research


COGNITION AND EXPRESSION

Essays and study summaries in the research compendium, Critical Links: Learning in

the Arts and Student Academic and Social Development, directed our attention to

the opportunities and potential rewards of further studies of the cognitive processes

and expressive abilities developed in arts learning experiences. Authors in Critical

Links discuss a variety of important cognitive capacities and achievement motivations

engaged in the arts. They propose future studies, among others, of the specific cog-

nitive characteristics and effects of each of the art forms, their relationships to other

domains of learning, and their roles in the intellectual development of children and

adolescents. The task force considered these proposals in our discussions and

sought to frame opportunities for research that would engage the interests and meth-

ods not only of those currently involved in studying the arts but also of those

concerned more generally with learning, cognition, and neural processes. We believe

that the engaging and complex processes of art making, performing, and responding

could prompt valuable and rewarding study and dialogue among scholars and

researchers from multiple disciplines.

I



THE ARTS AND COGNITIVE DEVELOPMENT


The arts have long been identified as highly demandingcognitive activities (Eisner, 2002; Perkins, 1994). Recog-nizing this, recent research in arts education exploresthe cognitive development of students engaged in artslearning, and attempts to unpack the cognitiveprocesses employed and developed in creating, per-forming, and responding to works of art. Researchsummarized in Critical Links, for example, identifies arange of cognitive capacities engaged in and nurturedby learning in the arts, including focused perception,elaboration, problem solving, and elements of creativethinking including fluency, originality, and abstractnessof thought (Deasy, 2002). Research might continue toexamine both how students develop these skills andtheir inclinations and dispositions to use them, as theygrapple with ideas, materials, and meanings in the arts(Fiske, 2000).

Further research is also needed to explore how cogni-tive capacities develop in the context of different artslearning experiences. Each of the artistic disciplinesmakes some similar and some unique demands. Thisarea of research might examine both similarities and dif-ferences in cognitive demands and development acrossartistic disciplines. How are judgment, reasoning, inter-pretation, discernment, and reflection—capacitiesdemanded broadly across arts disciplines—developedand deployed? How are ideas represented in music, asdistinct from visual arts or dance? What are the interpre-tive demands of theater and how do those align with theinterpretation of sculpture or poetry? Finding alignmentamong the ways in which the study of different artisticforms demands and nurtures complex thinking has sig-nificance for the development of comprehensive artsprograms and for our understanding of the nature ofthought in arts learning.

Research in arts learning must take into account not justthe specific art form being learned, but the nuances ofthe particular art experience with which the learner isengaged (e.g., choral vis-à-vis instrumental music; clas-sical vis-à-vis modern dance; or solo vis-à-vis ensemblelearning and expression) and the pedagogicalapproaches and classroom contexts (discrete artsclasses vis-à-vis integrated arts instruction; compositionor improvisation vis-à-vis skill-based instruction)(Horowitz and Webb-Dempsey, 2002). Research mightalso ask: What are the differing effects of an arts experi-ence for the audience and the artist? Do the differingvenues and procedures of practice and performanceengage and promote varying modes of learning andexpression, and do they affect the development of adap-tive expertise?

Future research on the arts would benefit from theinvolvement of scholars who bring a range of tools andperspectives to the study of cognitive processes. Closeobservation and documentation of learning and teach-ing, structured examination of artwork both producedand viewed by students, and analysis of students’ self-assessments and reflections are among the methodsthat show promise for yielding insight into these intel-lectual dimensions of arts learning.

Also important are the effects of artistic activities on thedevelopment of students’ identities as creators and con-tributors to society. With artistic productions, evenyoung students can draw upon a source of knowledgetypically richer and more personally meaningful than theknowledge required. This means that arts activities canallow even young students to create “authentic prod-ucts” valued as contributions to society rather thansimply as completed assignments in schools.


THE INTERACTION OF COGNITIVE ANDAFFECTIVE PROCESSES IN THE ARTS


Researchers have established that there are both cogni-tive and affective dimensions to work in the arts, buttheir interactions are still not deeply understood. Ideaspersist about the dichotomous nature of cognition andemotion. To many, they preclude each other. Others findthem inextricably linked. Exploring ways in which theseprocesses interact is an important opportunity forresearchers. Research could focus on their interactionsin individual artistic disciplines and in different aspectsof artistic activity, including composition, improvisation,interpretation, and performance. Because arts experi-ences are part of many school learningenvironments—as discrete arts classes or integratedwith the teaching of other academic subjects—researchers may also study cognitive and affectiveengagement and development in these varying con-texts, considering whether or in what ways they relateto student engagement, and learning more broadly.

Study of the relationship of cognitive and affectiveprocesses in the arts will likely include methods fromthe fields of ethnography, anthropology, and psychol-ogy—including neuroscience. These investigations willrequire close observation of students at work in authen-tic settings, interviews with students and teachers, andanalysis of student work and reflections. Researchersmight focus on at least four distinct, but interrelated,aspects of the arts learning experience:

• The emotional content of the art being made or stud-ied and how students’ affective responses inform andare formed by their cognitive engagement with thoseworks.

• The emotional dimensions of the social setting in artslearning environments and how these inform and areformed by the cognitive demands of the work.

• The impact on student engagement in learning, if cog-nitive and affective development are activatedsimultaneously in an arts learning experience.

• The impact on learning of the motivation involvedwhen creating artistic products to be shown to realaudiences outside of class (Cognition and TechnologyGroup at Vanderbilt, 1997).

Damasio’s work on the influence of emotion on logicalreasoning (1994; 1999), along with work in neuroscienceon the ways in which learning alters the physical struc-ture of the brain, may suggest ways in which thetechniques of neuroscience could, in coming years,focus on the arts as an especially powerful setting forexamining the ways in which the various regions of thebrain influence each other.

Findings from this line of inquiry should inform teachingand learning in all disciplines, and support educatorsseeking to understand the role of emotion in learning.


LEARNING AND ARTISTIC EXPRESSION


The role of language in acquiring and expressing knowl-edge of self and the world is well established, as is theunderstanding that its oral and written forms are notonly expressions of learning but themselves acts ofthinking and reflecting. Increasing competence in theforms of expression deepens and disciplines thoughtand understanding. Composing imaginative works in lan-guage also engages and embodies rich emotionalcontent, intensifying and stimulating the learning experi-ence for writer and reader.

Theoreticians (Eisner, 2002; Greene, 2001) and artistshave long argued that the arts serve similar purposes, acase readily made for the literary and dramatic arts.Visual, musical, and dance forms are also clearlyintended by the artists to shape and convey intellectualand emotional content and to evoke intellectual andemotional response. The process of producing a work ofart engages the artist in an iterative exploration of ideasand emotions as the work proceeds. The process alsoengages the artist in drawing on, expanding, and deep-ening knowledge related to and embodied in the form(for example, human anatomy, motivations, and behav-ior; history; and the structures of the natural world).Intensive study and response to artwork can elicit simi-lar processes in the respondent; therefore the artspresent a learning experience for both artist and audi-ence.

Advances in the theories and methods of the cognitivesciences and neurosciences make possible new explo-

rations of these claims for the arts and their import forhuman education and development. Each of the artforms engages in its own way specific physical, cogni-tive, and affective processes—modes of thought inaction. Exploring the specific expressive activities ofdrawing, sculpting, composing, dramatizing, choreo-graphing, or writing poetry might add to theunderstanding of the cognitive processes engaged inlearning and could yield insights important to the questfor effective educational practices. Opportunities toexperience the iterative processes of “art making” (con-tinually refining ideas based on formative assessmentby oneself and others) may be especially valuable forenhancing students’ abilities to learn throughout life.

A more general question goes beyond the relationshipsof artists and their creations and the responses of audi-ences to them. This is the question of what role therepresentations engaged by art forms may play in thestimulation, cultivation, and production of new concep-tions and deeper understanding in other domains.Visualization and drawing, for instance, are at play in sci-entific thought, as Da Vinci, Einstein, and Crick andWatson testify. Scholars such as Tufte (1983, 1998)show how artistically informed presentations of datacan enhance understanding. How might human thoughtand development also be advanced by intentionaldeployment of the processes central to music, dance,and theater? And how would more consistent and inten-tional engagement with any of the artistic forms andprocesses affect learners?


THE ARTS AND THE TRANSFER OF LEARNING


Many recent studies examining student cognitive andsocial development in the arts, including those in thecompendium Critical Links, have looked at issues ofwhat cognitive scientists refer to as “transfer”—that is,whether learning in one context has a relationship tolearning in other contexts. As identified in Critical Links,an important task for future research on arts and educa-tion will be to attend to complex contemporary theoriesof learning and transfer (Catterall, 2002).

Research on the arts and learning might, for example,follow the cues of Bransford and Schwartz (1999), whopresent a definition of transfer that contrasts sharplywith prevailing conceptions, including those seen in Crit-ical Links (Catterall, 2002). These scholars argue thattraditional studies of transfer are narrow in their searchfor direct and immediate applications of learning. (Thatis, typical approaches to transfer are based on “directapplication” theories that use tests of “sequesteredproblem solving” where no new learning resources aremade available to the learner). A contrasting approachassesses the degree to which a learning experiencemight prepare students for future learning. This requiresnew kinds of assessments that provide resources fornew learning rather than testing transfer in asequestered problem-solving mode.

Bransford and Schwartz (1999; see also Schwartz,Bransford, and Sears, in press) show that newapproaches to conceptualizing and measuring transfermake visible the benefits of a variety of learning experi-ences whose value remains invisible when researchersuse only traditional measures of transfer. For example,hands-on opportunities to manipulate data from a set ofmemory experiments are much less valuable for learn-ing about memory theories than simply hearing a lectureabout these theories. However, if these same hands-onopportunities are accompanied by the lecture, studentslearn more from the lecture than if they had read a sum-mary of it before hearing it. The hands-on exploratoryactivities better prepare students for future learning (in

this case from the lecture), because the students nowhave a much more nuanced basis of experience fromwhich to begin.

Future research might thus ask how engagement withthe arts affects students’ thinking skills, dispositions,and inclinations to work with complex ideas in ways thatprepare them for future opportunities to learn new infor-mation, invent, collaborate, and otherwise engage inproductive activities. Particular attention might be paidto students’ preparation for learning not only withinschool contexts but in work contexts as well. Many ofthe skills and habits developed in the arts (Deasy, 2002)are similar to those that have been identified by employ-ers as highly desirable (SCANS, 1992).

In addition to focusing on “preparation of future learn-ing” measures of transfer, it is important to focus on thespecific kinds of arts experiences made available to stu-dents. As suggested in Critical Links, studies aimed atdeveloping a more thorough understanding of the trans-fer of learning in the arts will benefit from increasedspecificity in defining and measuring the arts learningvariable (Catterall, 2002). Current studies of the roles ofthe arts in cognitive and social development do notunpack the learning processes in the arts that couldaccount for transfer either in fine detail or within com-prehensive cognitive models. Many employ simpletreatment-control designs, looking for a particular devel-opment among students who have had an arts learningexperience versus those who have not (for example, onegroup dramatizes stories, a comparison group reads anddiscusses stories; one group takes keyboarding lessons,another does not). A widespread limitation of suchdesigns is that they pay little or no attention to specificqualities of arts learning or any scaling of the extent oflearning in the arts. Thus such studies typically do notcontribute to an understanding of how variations inlearning in the arts relate to variations in outcomesunder investigation.


THE ARTS, LITERACY, AND LANGUAGE


Two interrelated perspectives are brought to bear in dis-cussions of the arts and literacy. One holds that“literacy” describes the processes used to acquire andexpress meaning in symbolic form, and so is appropri-ately applied to visual and performing art forms (Boyer,1995; Eisner, 2002). In this sense, the generic term “lan-guage” describes modes of communicating. Weembrace this view in our discussions of cognition andexpression elsewhere in this document. A second per-spective holds that mastering the visual and performingarts can advance students’ uses of oral and written ver-bal forms (Deasy, 2002). Studies and commentaries inCritical Links demonstrate that solid work is accumulat-ing to support this perspective: that the arts and oraland written language share interrelated physical andsymbolic processes.

Nearly half of the studies reported in Critical Linksexplore the relationships between the arts and literacyand language development. While these relationshipsare found across all of the visual and performing artforms, research is currently most robust on the relation-ships between literacy and language development andlearning in music and in drama.

Music features a symbol system that shares fundamen-tal characteristics with language, for instance, decodingand encoding procedures and syntactic and expressivestructures (Scripp, 2002). Hetland (2000) and Rauscheret al. (1997, 2000) firmly establish the relationship ofmusic and spatial-temporal reasoning, a capacityemployed in both language and mathematics, as

pointed out by Scripp (2002) and Catterall (2002). Scrippalso discusses the complex marriage of sound and textin both music and language.

In an essay summarizing the body of drama studies inCritical Links, Catterall finds that dramatic enactments,particularly by young children, enhance their abilities tocomprehend texts, identify characters, and understandcharacter motivations (Catterall, 2002b). Studies alsoindicate that dramatic activities improve writing profi-ciency. The majority of the studies discussed byCatterall focus on young children. He suggests contin-ued exploration of their findings and implications forearly literacy development, and urges attention to the“obvious void” of studies involving older students.

Dance and visual arts studies are underrepresented inCritical Links. Clearly, dance employs its own symbolicsystem embracing both choreographic notation and alanguage of movement and gesture. The visual arts,which rival music in their prominence in our schools,offer opportunities to explore imagery and visualizationas modes of thought and expression. Research couldexplore relationships among these modes and the oraland written forms of language.

Critical Links also presents indications that the arts, asintense forms of self- and group expression and realiza-tion, engage and motivate students to learn and tomaster the forms of oral and written communication.This suggests another line of inquiry that could relatethe arts to literacy and language development.


THE ARTS AND YOUNG CHILDREN


The importance of arts experiences in the developmentof young children is virtually uncontested, because it is auniversally shared experience. As was shown in YoungChildren in the Arts: Making Creative Connections (Gold-hawk et al., 1998), play is the work of young children,and the arts are a natural vehicle for young children’splay.

While the place of the arts in the development of youngchildren requires no justification, it does merit deeperunderstanding. Many have asserted a constructive rela-tionship between arts experiences and benefits such asincreased motivation, skill in symbol manipulation, andeven enhanced skill in building social relationshipsamong young children (Deasy, 2002). How might one goabout providing deeper understanding of the role of thearts in providing platform skills for later achievement?

The concluding section of How People Learn: Brain,Mind, Experience, and School (Bransford et al., 1999)suggests that the development of initial learning compe-tencies provides the foundation for transfer to newlearning opportunities. Bransford and colleagues assem-bled by the National Academy of Sciences, argue thatyoung children actively seek to make sense of theirworld and develop knowledge of their own learningcapacities (i.e., metacognition) very early. However, theyargue that these natural capacities for learning dependon catalysts and mediation. Arts education was not thefocus of this analysis, and additional research within thisspecific conceptual framework of the developing childwill be most productive.

Within this general framework of potential research, twoareas seem especially ripe with potential for exploringthe relationship between the arts and development:self-regulation and expressive skills. Self-regulation ofbehavior generally refers to controlled, cognitive moni-toring of the actions and steps required to obtain a goal,or to bring about a desired response from the environ-ment. According to an ERIC/ EECE report (Blair, 2003),“preschool activities that exercise impulse control, sus-tained attention, and working memory are likely topromote the development of cognitive skills importantfor knowledge acquisition in the early elementarygrades.” Expression, the ability to communicate mean-ing and feelings, while clearly related to self-regulationand cognitive development, appears to be a necessarytask of child development that is too often overlookedand is especially appropriate for research in arts educa-tion.

An interesting side note to this research topic is thatsome researchers (e.g., Schwartz, Bransford, and Sears,in press) argue that effective learning at all ages requiresa balance between, on the one hand, well-learned rou-tines that provide efficiency and, on the other hand,opportunities for innovation that involve play and socialinteraction, which often allows new insights to emerge.The research discussed in this section may thereforehave implications beyond the development of youngchildren per se.


SOCIAL AND PERSONAL DEVELOPMENT

We share the concerns of those investigating the processes and conditions that pro-

mote healthy and successful growth and development of children and youth. Critical

Links prompted us to take a look at how arts learning and involvement, in a variety of

in-school and out-of-school contexts, might contribute to these developments. The

studies it reports indicate that the arts, as individual and collective forms of expres-

sion, engender both self- and group identity, and that coping with and succeeding at

the inherent challenges and frustrations of art-making demands persistence and sup-

ports resilience. Ensemble art forms require a balance of individual expression within

a social context that appears to foster a variety of personal and social skills, including

cooperative learning, empathy, and tolerance. We believe that exploring these

aspects of the arts learning experience may help to address issues of concern to poli-

cymakers, practitioners, and researchers in education, sociology, and child and youth

development.

II



ARTS LEARNING AND SELF-IDENTITY


Arts learning experiences provide young people withopportunities to be producers as well as educated con-sumers of art and culture. These experiences have thepotential to help students develop a positive sense ofidentity in two ways: one, students envision a positivefuture for themselves, and two, they develop an identityfor themselves as individuals who can contribute to thesocial and cultural life of their communities. Given thecritical nature of identity formation and personalitydevelopment that occurs in adolescence, it is especiallyimportant to understand these processes as they takeplace in middle school and high school arts settings.

Even in early arts experiences in school, such as partici-pation in concerts, plays, and art exhibitions, studentsfind ways to entertain, educate, and inspire peers andadults. These experiences provide students with asense of their competence and their ability to makethings that are valued in their communities (Heath et al.,1998); they may also contribute to a young person’ssense of belonging, an important component of identitydevelopment (Noam, 1999). Arts-related internships andcommunity-based arts learning provide opportunities forolder students to learn about and experiment with workin the arts. These opportunities also allow them to meetand work with adults who have chosen to becomeartists or to make the arts a significant part of their lives.All of these experiences provide students with imagesof a variety of alternative roles to take in their ownfutures.

In adolescence in particular, development of self-identitymay be strongly affected by young people’s ability topractice and refine their newly developing cognitivecapacities for processing and analyzing information(Eccles & Gootman, 2002). Existing research in arts edu-cation suggests that arts learning experiences provideopportunities for youth to practice and further developthese types of cognitive skills (abstract thinking, criticalthinking, reflection) and that learning in the arts oftenboth demands, and provides vehicles for, alternativeways of examining and communicating important ideas,information, feelings, and understandings (Deasy, 2002).The arts may thus provide important opportunities foradolescents to hone their skills for exploration andanalysis and direct them inward, and to develop a posi-tive self-identity and understanding of themselves inrelation to the world around them. In addition, the artsoften include a strong component of self-assessment,which may also support identity development.

Work in the youth development field, such as that ofMcLaughlin (2000) and Heath (1999), could be a startingpoint for further research in this area. Studying theimpact of arts experiences on students’ futures calls forlongitudinal studies. In addition, attitudinal studies canreveal how students see their options in the near futureand their possible roles as adults.


ARTS LEARNING, PERSISTENCE, AND RESILIENCE


Arts learning experiences, especially in the ensemblearts, provide a rich environment for personal and socialdevelopment. Research on these settings suggests thatthese experiences challenge students to work collabora-tively, build a sense of responsibility to the group andthe project, and to persist despite anxieties and fears(Fiske, 2000). The development of this capacity to per-sist in the face of internal and external challenges iscrucial to one’s health and functioning as a young per-son (Dweck, 1989).

Youth growing up in conditions of comparative eco-nomic disadvantage often experience a large number ofrisk factors that present challenges in pursuing basic lifegoals—success in school, securing employment withpossibilities for advancement, and building and support-ing families, for example. Research suggests howeverthat protective factors that help young people to medi-ate risk are more predictive of positive outcomes thanrisk factors are of adverse outcomes (Benard, 2004). Allchildren have natural capacities for overcoming life chal-lenges, and opportunities to engage and strengthenthese capacities are important for healthy development(Benard, 2004; Noam, 1999). Researchers might pursueindications in Critical Links that arts learning experiencesprovide such opportunities for children and youth(Deasy, 2002). Arts learning for example, supports thedevelopment of empathy, self-efficacy, creativity, criticalthinking, and problem solving (Catterall, 2002)—abilitiesidentified as evidence of resilience (Benard, 2004). Thefindings of research exploring these outcomes of artslearning experiences would be important for all studentsand not just for students considered ‘at-risk.’

While the term “resilience” has particular meaning in thecontext of traumatic experiences, it can also carry simi-lar meaning in arts learning. Resilience has beendescribed as the capacity to emerge from difficult expe-riences, not only surviving and recovering, but with theability to make a positive contribution to one’s commu-nity or social group (Noam, 1999). Recent work withadolescents in New York City has employed the arts aspart of the strategy for building resilience in youth partic-ularly traumatized by the tragedies of September 11,2001. The multiple forms of expression provided by thearts created the possibility that these young peoplecould share thoughts and feelings that might otherwiseseem “unspeakable,” relating both to the September 11disaster and to more general feelings of fear, distrust,and rage. The arts helped to transform the process ofdealing with the situation into an act of creation ratherthan one of passive endurance. Resilience, in this con-text, implies an ability to emerge from a traumaticexperience with the interest and capacity to explorecomplex thoughts and feelings and to pursue, eveninsist on, a new kind of civic discourse among individu-als and groups. Many instances of this type of workhave been cited across the country and merit systematicinvestigation.

Research could deepen understanding of the role artslearning can play in helping young people in difficult sit-uations not only to survive those experiences but tobecome active, progressive, and creative forces in theirschools and communities. Research from youth devel-opment and social anthropology may provide clues topromising methods for these studies.


ARTS LEARNING AND SOCIAL SKILLS


Arts learning experiences engage a set of competenciesthat define and can influence a child’s relationship withothers, including peers, teachers, and family (Horowitzand Webb-Dempsey, 2002). Group processes are anobvious feature of the arts; they include, for instance,the give and take of ensembles during rehearsals; theactive interchanges while planning a production; theinterrelationships formally ordered by script, choreogra-phy, or musical composition; group reflection and peercritiquing as a mural takes shape; and a host of othercomplex and engaging interactions. When children workcollaboratively in an arts learning experience, they maylearn to respect differing viewpoints, take alternativeperspectives, listen to others, compromise, and harnesstheir collective skills in service of an overall artistic vision(Deasy, 2002). In the best circumstances, they learn theart of attentively listening to others’ verbal and musicalexpression and viewing their non-verbal and visualexpression. Wolf’s study of young children creating anoriginal opera (2000) summarizes this activity as “sus-tained collaborative action” to realize a narrative in musicincorporating experiences from the children’s daily lives.During this process, Wolf reports, children grow in thequality of their judgments about individual and groupcontributions to the work and in their ability to expressthe judgments to one another in honest and objectivelanguage.

The arts can strengthen relationships in schools, ofteninvolving multiple opportunities for collaboration amongstudents, teachers, visiting artists, and parents, and pro-vide an opportunity, in performances and art shows, forthe entire school community to come together (Burtonet al., 2001). Studies also show the role of the arts expe-rience as a mediating environment enabling studentswho feel marginalized in other social settings to becomemore comfortable and active participants in groupprocesses (Deasy, 2002). Research might explore therole of arts instruction, particularly drama (Catterall,2002b), in helping children develop an understanding ofor empathy for other people, historical figures, and dif-ferent cultures.

Critical Links urges that further studies explore thespecificity of the processes and effects of individual artforms, in this case the specific characteristics of thesocial interaction that each involves (Horowitz andWebb-Dempsey, 2002). Researchers might examine therelationships between an art form’s processes andeffects and student social attitudes and behaviors inother settings.


TEACHING AND LEARNING ENVIRONMENTS

The arts are present in schools in multiple ways, and they show up in the learning

and developmental experiences of children and youth both in school and in other set-

tings. Critical Links, as well as a number of recent large-scale arts education

evaluation studies and the research of scholars we consulted in developing this

report, prompted us to consider the effects of the arts on teachers and teaching, on

the relationships of students and adults, and on school culture and climate. Investi-

gating and invigorating these aspects of schooling has been a constant concern of

education policy and research. We believe those efforts can be substantially

advanced by research into the specific contributions of the arts. In our deliberations

we also took note of new technologies that may reshape educational practices and

present new modes of artistic activity. Careful study of these developments and their

effects is an important area of inquiry. We believe, too, that advances in technology

as well as other social changes will prompt researchers to examine how teaching and

learning activities in schools should relate to learning and experiences outside of

school. Partnerships between schools and community cultural organizations are one

attempt to make those relationships effective, but a larger issue may be how to

bridge the cultural life of the young person—saturated and shaped as it is by dance,

drama, music, and visual forms—with the formal culture of the school and formal

instruction in the arts.

III



PRACTICES AND ATTITUDES OF CLASSROOM TEACHERS


National data indicate that approximately half of Ameri-can teachers leave the profession within the first fiveyears of teaching (Ingersoll, 2001). The reasons nodoubt vary, but such a large-scale exodus suggests notonly the daunting demands and challenges of teachingbut also that current supports and rewards are not suffi-cient to provide the skills and motivation to continueteaching. Policymakers and administrators are searchingfor support systems and incentives to attract and holdteachers in the profession. Recent studies that indicatepositive changes in the attitudes of teachers who inte-grate the arts into their teaching practices suggestfruitful lines of further inquiry (Deasy, 2002).

Oreck (2004) found that teachers in general—regardlessof their own personal knowledge or experiences in thearts—believe that arts experiences are valuable for stu-dents. A strong motivation for non-arts teachers tointegrate the arts into their classrooms, he found, wasthe desire to increase their own enjoyment of teaching.Similarly, teachers involved in studies summarized inCritical Links reported a new enthusiasm and commit-ment to the teaching profession, and also reported thattheir roles in arts programs and instruction positivelychanged their perceptions of, and attitudes toward, stu-dents (Deasy, 2002). Burton and others have also foundthat teacher-student relationships are improved in arts-rich schools (2001).

In the Oreck study, teachers cited three conditions cru-cial to incorporating the arts into their teaching:

adequate time to plan and deliver these new instruc-tional approaches, support from direct supervisors, andappropriate space. They want and respond to profes-sional development programs that strengthen their selfimage and self-efficacy relative to the arts, programsthat develop their understanding and art-making capaci-ties. “Surprisingly,” Oreck reports, “neither prior formalarts instruction nor current artistic practice outside ofschools were found to be significant predictors of artsuse in teaching.”

Corbett and others, in the evaluation of the A+ Schoolsprogram in North Carolina (2001), found that profes-sional development programs that engaged an entireschool faculty in exploring the role of the arts in instruc-tion created a context of support for experimentationand change. Similarly, they found that forming networksof school personnel across the 35 A+ schools fostereda sense of support for innovation.

Studies that build on these findings can further clarifythe professional development processes and conditionsthat invigorate teaching, and explore the role that thearts might play in doing so. How have the participantsmodified their own learning and teaching practices?What conditions were supportive or detrimental to theirdevelopment? How have they modified their percep-tions of students and the teaching profession?


STUDENT-TEACHER RELATIONSHIPS ANDTHE ROLE OF THE STUDENT IN ARTS LEARNING ENVIRONMENTS


Research suggests that the role of the young person inarts learning environments (both in discrete and inte-grated arts experiences) may be different from thestudent role in non-arts learning environments—in par-ticular—that the former may be naturally youth-centered(Heath and Smyth, 1999; Stevenson, 2004; Wootton,2004). In an arts learning experience, individual studentstaught the same artistic skills will create different worksof art, not just because of their varying levels of skillmastery, but also because of the unique sets of experi-ences and ideas they bring to bear in the artistic process(Stevenson, 2004). The student creates something new,something even the teacher cannot create. The studentis thus purposefully engaged and at the center of thelearning experience, and the teacher a facilitator (Woot-ton, 2004). Exploring these dynamics may be ofparticular interest to researchers pursuing indications inyouth development literature and cognitive science thatyouth-centered, purposeful settings support both posi-tive youth development and learning (Eccles & Gootman,2002; McLaughlin, 2000; Bransford et al., 1999).

Research might also examine the efficacy of teachers’instruction in classrooms where the arts are integratedwith other academic subjects. As students bring theirlife experiences into the classroom through arts learningactivities, a window opens through which teachers cancome to know students and their cultural backgroundsin meaningful ways (Stevenson, 2004; Wootton, 2004).Keeping in mind evidence emerging from cognitive sci-ence that student learning is stronger and morepersistent if new knowledge is built in connection withprior knowledge (Bransford et al., 1999), researchers

could examine whether teachers use understandings oftheir students developed through the arts to help stu-dents make connections between prior and newknowledge. Research might also pursue indicationsfrom Oreck (2004) that the arts help teachers to betterunderstand their students’ profiles as learners. Teachersin Oreck’s study state that their strongest motivation forincluding the arts in their classrooms was the arts’ posi-tive effect on “their awareness of the diversity ofstudent strengths, learning styles, and intelligences.”

When teachers in a large-scale arts education evaluationwere asked which of their students benefited from thearts, they consistently stated that the arts benefited allsub-populations within their classrooms (Corbett et al.,2001). A new report (Stevenson, 2004) looking at artseducation in high poverty schools finds that teachersdescribe general positive changes in their instructionalpractice after bringing the arts into their classrooms, butalso that they see those changes as most important forstudents previously regarded as “hard to reach,” includ-ing English language learners and students fromeconomically disadvantaged backgrounds. Similarly,Oreck (2004) found that teachers believe arts learningexperiences have important benefits for “students whospeak English as a second language, those with variousspecial therapeutic needs, and artistically talented stu-dents.” Research might examine the indication thatarts-related changes in teacher practice may be particu-larly beneficial for certain populations of students.


THE ARTS AND SCHOOL CLIMATE AND CULTURE


School climate is typically seen as a commitment to anexplicit set of beliefs and is usually measured by surveyinstruments (Brookover, 1978). School culture is typicallydescribed as the assumptions that undergird explicitstatements and is usually studied using qualitativemethods. Researchers see school climate as a manipu-lable variable. In contrast, predicting the results ofintervention on school culture is more complex and diffi-cult, since school culture constitutes the assumptionsthat people use to interpret efforts to change (Sarason,1971). Culture also includes “material culture” (Johnson,1980; Proshansky and Wolfe, 1974). In this, the physicalenvironment shapes what is perceived to be possible,because of assumptions about its meaning and what itallows or discourages. Both climate and culture affectlearning and the ability of schools to improve (NationalCenter for Effective Schools Research, 1989; Pink andNoblit, 2004). Some school reforms (James Comer’sSchool Development Program, for instance) explicitlytrack changes in school climate as part of their reformstrategy. It is also clear that, to be effective in improvingstudent learning, school reform efforts must either fitthe culture of the school or be able to change the cul-ture of the school (Pink and Noblit, 2004). Finally, manystudies have demonstrated that instruction that is “cul-turally responsive or congruent” with students is likelyto lead to better student outcomes (Gay, 2000). Thesesame studies have shown that typical school culturereflects the norms of the middle class and thus disad-vantages other students.

Only limited study exists regarding what the arts con-tribute to the climate and culture of schools. Indeed, theargument is often framed in the other direction, namelythat the existing school culture often limits the possiblecontributions of the arts (Geahigan, 1992; Goodlad,1992). An evaluation report of the A+ Schools Programin North Carolina, The Arts, School Identity and Compre-hensive Education Reform, concluded that A+ schools

developed different cultural identities with the arts, andthat these identities made a large difference in what thearts could contribute to the school and to educationreform (Corbett et al., 2004). Schools that had a “sub-stantive identity” used the arts both to changethemselves and to manage the environments external tothe schools. These same schools also had impressivegains in student achievement. Adkins and Gunzenhauser(2001) found that aligning the schools’ definition of thearts with that of its community had effects both onachievement and on the perceived role of the schoolwithin the community. Gordon (2002) examined how aschool made meaning from an arts-based school reforminitiative and how those meanings changed as theschool context changed. Finally, McKinney (2002)demonstrated that the material culture of arts and regu-lar elementary classrooms affected what students couldaccomplish. In particular, the arts classroom was struc-tured for production and afforded movement andmaterials related to that end. The regular classroom wasstructured to restrict movement and access to materialsand to reinforce individual practice of skills for achieve-ment testing. Importantly, we know little about how thearts contribute to making school culture more continu-ous with the cultures of students outside the dominantsocial and economic groups.

Comparative studies, both quantitative and qualitative,would seem to be especially important in establishingthe specific contributions of the arts to changes in theclimate and culture of schools. Ethnographies of artsand arts-enhanced schools are needed to better under-stand the role the arts play in shaping culture,instruction, and learning in schools. Such researchmight also compare the role of the arts in schools andthe home cultures of students, and provide informationabout how the communities’ cultural beliefs about thearts influence arts education.


INTEGRATED AND INTERDISCIPLINARY ARTS PROGRAMS


Education policymakers and administrators are increas-ingly inclined to promote—particularly in the elementaryor middle school years—“integrated arts” or “interdisci-plinary arts” programs that link arts learning andexperiences with instruction in other school subjectsand skill areas. Rationales for these programs rangefrom the theoretical to the practical. The programs ofteninvolve a thematic or project-based design, which propo-nents argue engages students actively in processes thatdeepen their understandings and abilities more richlythan study within a single discipline. Other proponentsare more motivated by practical considerations, includ-ing the need to fulfill curriculum mandates to cover anarray of subjects and skills in the limited school day.

The current standards-based environment expects cur-riculum, instruction, and assessments to be shaped bystandards, which are discipline-specific. Designers ofintegrated programs typically select a cluster of contentand skills from a variety of standards and develop learn-ing experiences intended to enable students to masterthe cluster of outcomes. They assume that the pro-grams will engage students in activities that enhancetheir knowledge and competence in each discipline aswell as across disciplines (for instance, in history andvisual art, or music and reading).

These programs raise a number of questions concerningthe content and skills that students learn and the intel-lectual processes involved. Is learning actuallydeepening in each of the related disciplines, and, if so,in what ways? Might students develop important under-standings that are deeper or different from thosearticulated within the standards? How do we assess thelearning within these programs? What preparation andsupport do teachers need to deliver these programs?

In their Critical Links essays, Catterall (2002), Horowitzand Dempsey (2002), and Scripp (2002) suggest that thecognitive capacities engaged in arts learning are interre-lated, interactive, and similar to capacities engaged byother school subjects. Intentionally constructing learningexperiences involving the arts and other disciplines toengage these processes, they suggest, couldstrengthen students’ overall intellectual developmentand the application of the processes within academicand social settings. Opportunities that the arts providefor iterative design and continuous improvement may beespecially important experiences for students. Inte-grated and interdisciplinary arts programs provide theopportunity for researchers to explore these sugges-tions and assist in improving program designs..


NEW TECHNOLOGIES AND ARTS LEARNING


New technologies—notably computers, digital soundand visual image recording, and the Internet—arechanging both the nature of the arts and the nature ofarts education. The public now has unprecedentedaccess to works of art from all historical periods andacross many cultures. The Internet, in particular, hasmade whole museum collections as well as extraordi-nary amounts of scholarly material widely available tostudents and teachers. Research might examine howteachers have used these technologies both in theteaching of the arts and in bringing the arts into theteaching of other subjects (for example, the use ofappropriate visual art works in the study of a particularhistorical period). In collaboration with museum educa-tion researchers, arts education researchers couldproductively study the most—and least—promisinguses of these resources.

New technologies have led to the creation of new artis-tic media and forms. To date, little research has exploredthe particular cognitive and physical demands and possi-bilities inherent in work in these new media. Further

research might be done to explore the consequences ofpursuing work in these new media and forms. Whatmight students lose or gain from such artistic experi-ences? Will some learners find unique expressiveoutlets in these forms and others be left behind? Com-puter scientists and the designers of new technologiesmight well join in and even provide critical leadership inthis area. As technologies are adapted and discovered,and as new uses for available technologies are devised,researchers might find further grist for work pertainingto the arts.

From a methodological perspective, this is an excitingarea of research. The new technologies themselves pro-vide intriguing ways of capturing student work, studentreflections, and critical appraisal from a variety of audi-ences and experts. Researchers in the area of distancelearning have begun to pioneer some sophisticated, yetaccessible techniques for studying learning through theuse of technology, including the creation of digital port-folios. Research into the arts could usefully employ suchtools.


PARTNERSHIPS BETWEEN SCHOOLS AND CULTURAL ORGANIZATIONS


Structured collaborations between schools and culturalorganizations to provide arts education to students havegrown and matured in recent decades. In BeyondEnrichment (1996), Remer describes an evolution fromoccasional experiences—visits by students to museumsor concerts, or performances by artists at schools—toplanned and coordinated arts programs, which attend tothe curricular and instructional expectations of schoolsand to the support and developmental needs of teach-ers and artists. A variety of factors prompted theevolution, including the involvement of what have beencalled “mediating entities”—government agencies, pri-vate foundations, universities—that encouraged,supported, and often financed the relationships. Forinstance, grant programs of the National Endowment forthe Arts and the U.S. Department of Education encour-age, and in some cases require, partnerships for bothin-school and after-school arts education.

The Arts Education Partnership has published analysesand guidance on the processes for structuring and man-aging partnerships (Dreeszen et al., 1999). Seidel andothers at Harvard’s Project Zero have analyzed throughcase studies the factors contributing to sustainability

and the differences in arts education partnerships fromother partnership types (Seidel et al., 2001). Recent eval-uations in which arts education partnerships wereformed as instruments for whole school change discussa variety of effects on individuals, schools, and culturalorganizations (Horowitz, 2004). A new study by Steven-son (2004) examines their effects on schools andcultural organizations serving populations of economi-cally disadvantaged students.

Because partnerships are a growing and substantialfacet of the institutional configurations providing artseducation to students, they merit study from multipleperspectives. For instance, at this juncture researchersmight examine partnerships from the perspective pro-vided by microeconomics, employing its concepts of“reciprocity” and “transactional costs.” House hasrecently called attention to this approach in public edu-cation in Schools for Sale (1998). House’s approachprovides a powerful tool for examining the transactioncosts of school reform proposals engaged in partner-ship and of the partnership’s potential viability. Applyingthis or other social science frameworks could be veryproductive in arts education research.


PROFESSIONAL ARTISTS TEACHING IN SCHOOLS


A central aim of education policymakers is to improvethe content knowledge and teaching methods of teach-ers in elementary and secondary schools. New federaland state policies related to teacher certification andundergraduate accreditation reflect this concern. In addi-tion to strengthening the performance of individualteachers, many call for school faculties to create learn-ing communities that nurture continuous intellectualdevelopment and advances in pedagogy (McLaughlinand Talbert, 2001). Explorations of the characteristicsand roles of distributed expertise within such communi-ties and their impact on teaching quality and studentlearning might attract the attention of researchers.

Of the subjects in the school curriculum, the arts are vir-tually unique in having a cadre of professionals in thecommunity skilled in the disciplines taking an active rolein instructing students. The growing and extensive col-laborations of these professional artists with teachers indelivering arts instruction provide a potentially fruitfularea of inquiry into the characteristics and effects ofsuch collaborations and their relevance to other schoolsubjects.

In part, the increasing role of “teaching artists” in recentdecades has been stimulated by the arts education poli-cies and support of the National Endowment for theArts and related state arts agencies, which have pro-moted artist-in-residence programs. At the same time,national and community arts and cultural organizationshave responded to a variety of circumstances andmotives—cutbacks in school programs, audience devel-opment, desires of financial supporters—to expand thescope of their program offerings in schools. Recognizingthat teaching will be an option for students planning aprimary career as professional artists, higher educationinstitutions have begun offering these students trainingin pedagogy. Similarly, arts and cultural organizationshave developed training programs and provide support

both to artists and to arts and classroom teachers inschools, recognizing the needs and complexities ofeffective collaboration.

Several studies in Critical Links examine programs thatinvolve professional artists. They indicate that artists’involvement can intensify the learning experiences ofstudents, add to the skills repertory of teachers, andimprove the pedagogy and classroom managementskills of participating artists (Deasy, 2002). Funders andcultural organizations actively engaged with schoolshave commissioned evaluations of these collaborativeprograms, finding positive impacts on students, teach-ers, and other school personnel as well as on artists andcooperating institutions (Horowitz, 2004). In addition tothe content instruction in the arts that occurs throughteacher-artist partnerships, their ancillary effects alsowarrant examination. For example, a classroom teacherworking with a teaching artist often must take thelearner role in front of the class. Teachers report beingreminded of what their students experience in theirclassrooms every day, and students report that seeingtheir teacher in the learner role supports their own posi-tive risk-taking in the classroom (Stevenson, 2004).

This growing phenomenon of artist-teacher partnershipsoffers a body of practice that can be investigated todetermine the characteristics of the most effective col-laborations and their impact on teachers, students, andschool communities. What are the effects of such col-laborations on the learning of students? What are theireffects on the collaborating individuals, schools, andcommunity organizations? What conditions foster themost effective collaboration and learning experiencesfor participants? For policymakers and practitioners inother academic areas, such research could offer guid-ance as to the strategies and practices that may beapplicable in other school subject areas.


COMMUNITY, DEMOCRACY, AND CIVIL SOCIETY

America and its schools face new challenges in embracing and mediating among the

varying beliefs, values, and backgrounds of an increasingly diverse population. Our

fundamental commitments to pluralism and democracy require that we do so, or put

at risk the civic and social institutions rooted in those commitments. Public education

is charged with nurturing those commitments and preparing the young for civic and

social roles, a charge made firmer by Brown vs. the Board of Education and subse-

quent civil rights decisions regarding race, ethnicity, gender, and disability. The case

that the arts contribute to the development of democratic values has been argued

eloquently by philosophers and theoreticians. We are encouraged as well by empiri-

cal studies—including a number in Critical Links—that point to arts’ effects such as

positive social interactions, tolerance, attention to moral dilemmas, and the develop-

ment of personal and group identity. At a time when engagement in civic activities

nationwide is at an all-time low (or, as Putnam (2000) describes, a time when Ameri-

cans are increasingly “bowling alone”), schools might look to the arts for meaningful

ways to nurture a sense of community and create a climate and culture that models

and imparts democratic values to students.

IV



THE ARTS AND GROUP LEARNING


Arts learning experiences often involve more than onelearner. Music ensembles, theatre productions, dancepresentations, classroom murals, and collaborative cre-ative writing are all examples. While the arts do not havea monopoly on group learning experiences, they offerrich opportunities to gain skills in a group setting andalso to create and display final products.

Because the arts provide many and diverse examples ofgroup learning, they are a laboratory for exploring thedynamics of group learning in general, including the dis-tributed nature of expertise in groups andmotivation-related learning experienced by group mem-bers. The arts are also a venue for exploring specificelements of collaborative learning environments such asscheduling, the nature of group work assignments,enlisting and managing sub-groups or teams for variouspurposes, and the potential roles of the expert (whetherteacher or mentor) in the group learning process.

Researchers might also inquire into the specific qualitiesthe arts bring to group learning processes. What quali-ties of achievement motivation might they observe ingroup-fostered artistic growth and creation (such as theengagement of learners, their feelings of agency, or theplace of intrinsic and extrinsic reinforcement and thetendencies of the arts to induce motivation)? Do thesequalities depart systematically from acknowledged wis-dom about group learning in general? Do group effortsin the arts provide instances in which groups harnessdistributed expertise in novel or informative ways to

advance the learning of members or the quality of artis-tic products? Do such processes tend to differsystematically by art form? When pursuing work collab-oratively, do children respond differently to differencesin artistic expertise than to differences in, say, mathe-matics proficiency?

Equity of learning in artistic collaborations might be ofparticular interest. Do arts collaborations exhibit generaltendencies to enhance learning across all members of agroup? Do they tend to include or exclude memberswith differing expertise, especially those with lowexpertise? Can one observe qualities of equity that setsuch projects apart from group work in other academicdisciplines?

Finally, researchers might explore collaborative artsexperiences as a special case where learning in the artsmight transfer to students’ general academic and socialdevelopment. Transfer of learning from the arts is a cen-tral concern of Critical Links, but the work is rather silenton the dynamics and design of group learning and theroles that collaboration in and of itself may play in artslearning or transfer. Does increasing expertise in arts-based ensemble work transfer to individual skills ingroup process and group learning that might bear onnon-arts group projects? Do art collaborations generally,or do specific arts ensemble activities, produce high lev-els of generalized group production skills in comparisonto other sorts of non-arts project-based learning activi-ties commonly orchestrated in schools?


THE ARTS AND PARTICIPATION IN A DEMOCRATIC SOCIETY


A fundamental purpose of schooling in America is toenable students to develop the values, understandings,and habits essential to a democracy and to apply themin their personal and public lives. Dewey (1954)famously called these the “capacities for associated liv-ing.” More recently, in Democratic Education (1987),Gutman describes a set of “participatory virtues,” includ-ing “a sense of social commitment, political efficacy, adesire to participate, respect for opposing points ofview, and a critical distance from authority, among oth-ers.”

Concern that young people may not be developingthese capacities is currently stimulated by reports rang-ing from acts of violence in schools to low turnout byyoung voters. Schools also reflect the broader society’schallenges in integrating an increasingly diverse and plu-ralistic population into our democratic processes. Withinthe curriculum, instruction in history, civics, govern-ment—the “social studies”—has sought to developstudent knowledge of the nature and responsibilities ofcivic, social, and political participation. But, as habits areformed by practice, the culture, attitudes, and behaviorsof administrators, faculty, and students must also modeland inculcate democratic principles and practices.Recent efforts to involve students in “community serv-ice” programs recognize that active engagement in civiclife complements and enlivens academic instruction.

In his summary essay of the studies reported in CriticalLinks, Catterall (2002) discusses effects of arts learning

that correlate strongly with Gutman’s list, as well as withother analyses of the fundamentals of democracy. Forinstance, studies suggest that the intellectual and socialprocesses engaged in arts learning promote empathy,tolerance, and the inclination to seek solutions to prob-lems by invoking multiple perspectives. Eisner (1998)and others have pointed out that making and performingworks of art involve a productive tension between animaginative and bold openness to new possibilities anda commitment to the discipline and rigor of the form’stechnical demands. This resembles the give and take offreedom of expression and rule of law that is central to ademocracy. Catterall also discusses the growth in self-efficacy—the positive and authentic view of one’scapabilities and achievements—developed in masteringan art form, and the critical and reflective dispositionsthat accompany its development.

In their evaluation of the A+ Schools program in NorthCarolina, Corbett and others (2001) point to the effectsof the arts in developing shared values and a schoolidentity among faculty members; despite typicalchanges in school leadership, demography, andresources, they succeed in sustaining a positive schoolculture.

These studies suggest that arts engagement andprocesses nurture essential democratic values, habits,and actions. Pursuing these lines of inquiry more deeplymay advance a fundamental purpose of schooling.


THE ARTS AND SPECIAL STUDENT POPULATIONS


Special student populations at risk of exclusion or failurein school are many: children lacking facility in English,recent immigrants unfamiliar with school norms, stu-dents with feelings of difference accompanying specialphysical or emotional needs, students of comparativeeconomic disadvantage, or any group tending to experi-ence prejudicial or exclusionary treatment.

The arts may contribute to the success of these stu-dents in various ways. Students marginalized throughself-imposed or induced withdrawal to the periphery ofthe classroom may increase their involvement, perhapsbecause they enjoy or feel competent enough to partici-pate in arts activities. If, as a result, special populationsgain self-concept through the arts, their classmates andteachers may perceive them in a new and more positivelight, and a more reciprocal, inclusive social atmospherein the classroom could enhance instructional effective-ness for all students. Another possibility is that artseducation may, through intentional or serendipitousmechanisms, boost the academic achievement of allstudents, including special populations (e.g., Baum andOwen, 1997; Catterall and Waldorf, 2000).

Observers of arts education in action typically reportthat children are drawn to arts activities with enthusi-asm, and often with less concern for how their talentscompare to those of classmates than they display in

other school subjects. Studies reported in CriticalLinks—particularly evaluations of large-scale arts infu-sion in school curricula—note generally higher levels ofachievement motivation and engagement in arts-richschool settings. Critical Links studies also point to anarray of cognitive and affective benefits of engagementin the arts especially for special populations (Catterall,2002).

Students identified as needing special education serv-ices (currently over six million U.S. students) (Edwards,2004) present a particularly interesting research opportu-nity. Federal law requires an annual IndividualizedEducation Plan prescribing each such student’s instruc-tional program. In Arts Education in Public Elementaryand Secondary Schools (NCES, 2002), one-third of musicand arts teachers surveyed reported having input intothe designs and implementation of these plans.Research could explore the interrelationships of artsinstruction with other components of the plan.

Struggling adolescents might be considered a specialpopulation. With regular cadence over the years, someadolescents claim the arts as a main reason for stayingthrough high school (Horn, 1992). Research pursuingthis possibility could have implications for addressinghigh student dropout rates, particularly in urban schools.


THE ARTS AND BUILDING UNDERSTANDINGAMONG DIVERSE GROUPS


It is difficult to engage in any discussion of Americaneducation’s prospects and challenges without encoun-tering the issue of diversity. Racial and ethnic diversity isgrowing in schools; the nation’s students collectivelyspeak over 400 different languages (Kindler, 2002); andrecent federal education legislation demands the report-ing of educational achievement data by significant“subgroups” reflecting students’ race, relative economicadvantage, level of English language acquisition, andgender. There are opportunities for research to explorethe role of the arts in addressing diversity in meaningfulways and the implications for the design of effectiveschools and instruction.

Engaging in art rooted in cultural traditions may enableyouth to identify more deeply with their cultures andshare their cultures with others. When integrated intothe teaching of other school subjects, the arts provide avehicle for students to introduce their life experiencesinto the classroom in purposeful ways for the recogni-tion of their peers and teachers (Wootton, 2004).Students from diverse backgrounds can also use thearts to engage with each other and to build understand-ing around issues of race, culture, and socio-economics,taking positive risks as they explore and express impor-tant ideas and relationships (Deasy, 2002).

Researchers might pay particular attention to the bodyof practice in drama that engages youth in social changeand builds understanding among diverse groups (Man-dell and Wolf, 2003; Rohd, 1998). Drama allows youth totake on and explore multiple roles and perspectives(Deasy, 2002); it helps students understand charactermotivation, complex issues and emotions, and socialrelationships; and it promotes conflict resolution skills,engagement, and positive self-concept (Catterall, 2002).Research could usefully build on these findings as theyrelate to a diverse student population.

Another promising direction for research in this area isto explore multiple-arts experiences, where students areengaged in more than one art form. Researchers havefound that empathy can be an important outcome ofthese arts experiences (Catterall, 2002), which couldhold promise in building understanding among studentsfrom diverse backgrounds. Researchers might pursuethe relationship between imaginative skills developed inthe arts (Deasy, 2002) and the ability to empathize.Greene has suggested, “it may well be the imaginativecapacity that allows us also to experience empathy withdifferent points of view, even with interests apparentlyat odds with ours” (Greene, 1995).


THE STATUS AND CONDITION OF ARTS EDUCATION

We are concerned for a number of reasons that we lack reliable data on the amount

of time students in the United States spend studying the arts; on who provides the

instruction they do receive and under what conditions; and on the money spent on

school arts programs. Infrequent and inconsistent efforts are made at the federal

level to develop national figures, and state and local data are similarly spotty. The arts

may not be alone in this regard, but since claims are regularly made about their

growth or decline in schools in response to policy and economic changes, the

absence of solid data prevents systematic analysis and response. Similarly, federal

law and state policies assert that the arts are “core subjects” that should be taught to

every student. The absence of data makes monitoring of compliance difficult and

raises questions about equitable access to policy-mandated instruction in the arts.

We suggest, as well, pursuing international comparisons of the status and condition

of arts instruction and achievement to prompt rigorous and healthy debate about

their implications, as with recent comparisons of math and science instruction and

achievement.


V


STATUS, CONDITION, AND FINANCING OF ARTS EDUCATION


Federal and state laws and policies have put increasedpressure on public education to hold schools account-able for student performance in curricular areas. Thishas not been matched, however, by government effortsto collect data that would permit analysis of theresources for, and impact of, those policies. Arts educa-tion, generally believed to be a curricular areaparticularly susceptible to policy changes and realloca-tions of resources, is a case in point. Reliableinformation is unavailable about student access to artsinstruction, about the current and predicted availabilityof qualified teachers, and about student performance.The National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) con-ducted “Fast Response Statistical Surveys” of principalsand teachers in 1995 and 2000, but trend analysis waslimited and no state data can be derived from these sur-veys. A survey planned for 2004 has not been funded. Inthree decades only two national assessments of artslearning have been conducted, in 1972 and 1997;another is proposed for 2008. Few states include artsassessments in their accountability systems.

It is often asserted that arts education programs aresubject to budget cuts or elimination during times ofeconomic downturn, and when policy changes requireschools to focus on specific programs or needs. Manybelieve that schools in urban and rural areas are likely tobe hit harder during these times, and that the studentsin these schools lose access to arts programs morequickly than do their suburban counterparts. Unfortu-nately, there is no empirical data at the national level,

nor consistently at state and local levels, to support orrefute these hypotheses.

To move the discussion from anecdote to evidence willtake rigorous and regular empirical research on fundinglevels for arts education in schools. The research wouldestablish spending patterns over time for arts education,providing the basis for analyses of growth and declinerelative to other school expenditures at times of policychange and relative to general economic conditions.Such research would have a number of benefits for poli-cymakers and educators alike. For example, analysesbased on empirical data would help better assess thefinancial impact on arts education of proposed policychanges, and would help weigh the implications beforetheir adoption or implementation, clarifying both theintended and unintended consequences of policy deci-sions. Of particular importance, such analyses couldmonitor the distribution of financial resources and pro-gram impacts for general and special populations ofstudents in various school settings and geographicregions. These analyses would provide guidance onhow to insure equitable access to arts education for allstudents.

Federal government support is essential for comprehen-sive and regular collection, aggregation, and reporting ofnational arts education data. Designs, systems, andresources for similar efforts at the state and local levelalso are badly needed. Research on arts education isseriously hampered by the absence of these efforts.


THE IMPACT OF FEDERAL AND STATE POLICIES ON THE ARTS


Standards-based education and its related accountabilitysystems have been the dominant policy response at thefederal and state level over the past two decades to thecritiques of public elementary and secondary education,most famously the 1983 national report, A Nation atRisk. The Goals 2000: Educate America Act of 1994 andthe No Child Left Behind Act of 2001—both reauthoriza-tions of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of1965—advanced this policy agenda at the federal level.Virtually every state, in response both to requirementsof these laws and to public and legislative demandsenergized by A Nation at Risk, has adopted standards forstudent learning, as well as incentives and sanctions toencourage local schools to provide curriculum andinstruction aligned with the standards. These policiesexpress a commitment to equity and access to qualityinstruction for all students as a necessary condition tomeeting the expectations of the standards. The primarymethod for gauging school success and holding schoolsaccountable for student progress are standardized tests,primarily in reading and mathematics.

In addition to the general debate about the effective-ness of the standards and accountability movement,there are specific concerns about the impact of thestandards movement on student access to arts educa-tion. Federal and state laws and policies assert the need

for schools to provide arts education to all students anddeclare that students will progress in meeting contentand achievement standards in the arts. Virtually everystate has adopted standards for the visual and perform-ing arts. However, few states incorporate assessmentsof arts learning into their accountability systems. Thefederal government has conducted only two national,limited assessments of arts learning during the pastthirty years. Another is projected for 2008. Conventionalwisdom holds that “what is tested gets taught” andanecdotal reports claim that the arts and other schoolsubjects are being denied time and resources as a resultof time allocated to preparing and administering tests inreading and mathematics. These assertions need empir-ical scrutiny.

Methods and models other than standardized testingalso are needed to monitor the implementation of stan-dards, including arts standards. For instance, effortscould be made to develop methods to determine howthe “enacted curriculum” compares to officially adoptedmandates. Similarly, processes are needed for determin-ing actual student engagement time with artsinstruction, compared to reports that the arts are“offered” in schools. And work needs to continue indeveloping appropriate methods for assessing andreporting arts learning.


INTERNATIONAL COMPARISONS OF ARTS LEARNING


In To Open Minds: Clues to the Dilemma of Contempo-rary Education, Howard Gardner (1989) offers aparadigm for examination of the arts and educationthrough international comparisons. Based on his experi-ences in observing classrooms in China, the bookprovides a sensitive treatment of the differences in thetotal experiences of children in China and in the U.S.Additional comparative research on the arts and educa-tion in other cultures and countries, handled with similarsensitivity, would provide more clues for educatorsabout how the arts relate to learning.

The difficulties of comprehending other cultures shouldnot be minimized, but, as To Open Minds shows, therewards of such ethnographic study are great in under-standing the total arts and learning experience. Indeed,the Committee on a Framework and Long-termResearch Agenda for International Comparative Educa-tion Studies (NRC, 2003) recommends that the U.S.should “focus on understanding the education experi-ences of other countries in their own context to providea broader context for U.S. experiences and efforts toinnovate.”

In addition to ethnographic studies, however, interna-tional comparative research is needed that identifies thebasic landscape of arts and education from a world per-spective. We need to replace assumptions about theroles of the arts in other countries with comparativeinformation. Pertinent topics to explore might includethe objectives of school and non-school arts programsfor children, the participation of adults in the arts, thearts experiences of children in the schools, the charac-teristics of the formal and informal curriculum,preparation of instructors, and absolute and relativeresource investments. Such information is essential todeveloping fresh hypotheses about the arts and educa-tion.

We concur with the case for international comparativestudies made by the NRC committee (2003). They statethat such studies (1) help define what is achievable, (2)help us understand the consequences of different prac-tices and policies, (3) bring to light concepts that havebeen overlooked, and (4) help us question beliefs andassumptions that are taken for granted.



A CONCLUDING COMMENT FROM THE TASK FORCE: MOVING THE AGENDA FORWARD

In the scholarly work and research studies that our nine-member task force examined inpreparing this report, we find that arts education research has quietly matured as a field,and that its studies identify a set of similar developmental outcomes of arts learning experi-ences. The work is robust around issues of student development, and about the effects ofthe arts on communities and learning environments—issues that are the subject of inquiryby researchers in many fields. Though the methods used in this work vary in their type andquality, a host of similar and mutually reinforcing findings gives the accumulating research agood deal of weight.

The recent advances in arts education research provide a solid base from which to furtherexplore and assess learning and development in the arts. The recent work also clarifies chal-lenges we identify in this report, such as better defining the arts learning variable and beingmore specific about the nature of the arts learning experience. It gives impetus to new para-digms for considering the relationships between the learning and development that occur inarts engagement and in other developmental experiences. The arts as a mutual point offocus could fruitfully engage scholars from many disciplines. Cooperative development anddeployment of new or modified methods of both research and assessment would enrichinvestigations of learning in the arts and other fields. Assessment processes used in teach-ing the art forms have much to contribute to those of other disciplines, and much to learnfrom them.

The task force encourages government and private funding sources to move this researchagenda forward in two ways. The first is to help convene interdisciplinary meetings ofresearchers and scholars to evaluate, clarify, and expand on the opportunities for researchidentified in this report. Publication of the report represents a necessary but not sufficienteffort to call attention to this new approach to research in arts education.

The second way government and private funding sources can be instrumental in moving theagenda forward is to support the research of scholars pursuing the kind of research it advo-cates. One obvious mechanism for achieving this objective would be a competitive researchgrants program modeled after those the federal government, foundations, and private


organizations manage in other areas of scholarship, but not yet in the field of arts educationresearch. AERA, an organization with expertise in the conduct of such research competi-tions, has indicated its willingness to be involved in the creation and perhaps managementof a competitive, peer-reviewed, grants program.

We hope that our colleagues from the arts, education, and other disciplines will join thework of designing a research infrastructure for arts education similar to those in other fieldsof inquiry involving human behavior: achieving and maintaining a critical mass ofresearchers, developing frameworks of common understanding of central questions andmethodologies for addressing such questions, and creating a network appropriate for effec-tive translation of research and for communication with policymakers and practitioners.

As we take these next steps, we invite advice and comment on the research opportunitieswe have identified in this report and on our suggestions for carrying the agenda forward.We will be gratified to have begun a lively conversation.

32 • The Arts and the Purposes of Education: New Opportunities for Research



REFERENCES

Adkins, A., & Gunzenhauser, M. (2004). WestHollow School and the North Carolina A+Schools Program: Integrating the arts, craftinga local agenda for reform. In W. Pink and G.Noblit (Eds.), Cultural matters: Lessons fromseveral successful school reform strategies.Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.

Baum, S., & Owen, S. (1997). Using artprocesses to enhance academic self-regula-tion. Paper presented at ArtsConnectionnational symposium: New strategies for pro-moting student success. New York, NYFebruary 22, 1997.

Benard, B. (2004). Resiliency: What we havelearned. San Francisco, CA: WestEd.

Blair, C. (2003). Self-regulation and schoolreadiness. ERIC Digest, EDO-PS-03-7. Cham-paign, IL: ERIC Clearinghouse on Elementaryand Early Childhood.

Boyer, E.L. (1995). The basic school: A com-munity for learning. Stanford, CA: TheCarnegie Foundation for the Advancement ofTeaching.

Bransford, J.D. et al. (1999). How peoplelearn: Brain, mind, experience and school.Washington, DC: National Academy of Sci-ences.

Bransford, J.D., & Schwartz, A. (1999). Rethink-ing transfer: A simple proposal witheducational implications. In A. Iran-Nejad &P.D. Pearson (Eds.), Review of Research inEducation, 24.

Brookover, W. (1978). Elementary school cli-mate and school achievement. AmericanEducational Research Journal, 15, 301-318.

Burton, J., Horowitz, R., & Abeles, H. (2000).Learning in and through the arts: The questionof transfer. Studies in Art Education, 41(3), 228-257.

Catterall, J.S. (2002). The arts and the transferof learning. In R. Deasy (Ed.), Critical links:Learning in the arts and student academic andsocial development. Washington, DC: ArtsEducation Partnership.

Catterall, J.S. (2002b). Research on drama andtheater in education. In R. Deasy (Ed.), Criticallinks: Learning in the arts and student aca-demic and social development. Washington,DC: Arts Education Partnership.

Catterall, J.S., & Waldorf, L. (2000). Chicagoarts partnerships in education: Summary eval-

uation. In E. Fiske (Ed.), Champions of change:The impact of arts on learning. Washington,DC: Arts Education Partnership and the Presi-dent’s Committee on the Arts and theHumanities.

Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt(1997). The Jasper project: Lessons in curricu-lum, instruction, assessment, and professionaldevelopment. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Corbett, D. et al. (2001). The arts, school iden-tity, and comprehensive education reform: Afinal report from the evaluation of the A+schools program. Winston-Salem, NC: KenanInstitute for the Arts.

Damasio, A. (1994). Descartes’ error: Emotion,reason, and the human brain. New York, NY:G.P. Putnam.

Damasio, A. (1999). The feeling of what hap-pens: Body, emotion, and the making ofconsciousness. New York, NY: Harcourt Brace.

Deasy, R. (Ed.). (2002). Critical links: Learningin the arts and student academic and socialdevelopment. Washington, DC: Arts Educa-tion Partnership.

Dreeszen, C., April, A., & Deasy, R. (1999).Learning partnerships: Improving learning inschools with arts partners in the community.Washington, DC: Arts Education Partnership.

Dewey, J. (1954). The public and its problems.Athens, OH: Ohio University Press.

Dweck, C.S. (1989). Motivation. In A. Lesgoldand R. Glaser (Eds.), Foundations for a psy-chology of education. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Eccles, J., & Gootman, J.A. (Eds.). (2003).Community programs to promote youth devel-opment. Washington, DC: NationalAcademies Press.

Edwards, V. (2004). Quality counts 2004: Spe-cial education in an era of standards.Washington, DC: Education Week.

Eisner, E. (2002). The arts and the creation ofmind. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Eisner, E. (1998). The kind of schools we need:Personal essays. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Fiske, E. (Ed.). (2000). Champions of change:The impact of the arts on learning. Washing-ton, DC: Arts Education Partnership and thePresident’s Committee on the Arts and theHumanities.

Gay, G. (2000). Culturally Responsive Teaching:Theory, Research and Practice. New York, NY:Teachers College Press.

Gardner, H. (1989). To open minds: Clues tothe dilemma of contemporary education. NewYork, NY: Basic Books.

Geahigan, G. (1992). The arts in education: Ahistorical perspective. In B. Reimer and R.Smith (Eds.), The arts, education, and aestheticknowing. NSSE Yearbook. Chicago, IL: Univer-sity of Chicago Press.

Goldhawk, S. et al. (1998). Young children andthe arts: Making creative connections. Wash-ington, DC: Arts Education Partnership.

Goodlad, J. (1992). Toward a place in the cur-riculum for the arts. In B. Reimer and R. Smith(Eds.), The arts, education, and aestheticknowing. NSSE Yearbook. Chicago, IL: Univer-sity of Chicago Press.

Gordon, J. (2002). From Broadway to theABCs: Making meaning of arts reform in theage of accountability. Educational Founda-tions, 16(2), 33-54.

Greene, M. (2001). Variations on a blue guitar:The Lincoln Center lectures on aesthetic edu-cation. New York, NY: Teachers College.

Greene, M. (1995). Releasing the imagination:Essays on education, art and social change.San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

Gutman, A. (1987). Democratic education.Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Heath, S.B., Soep, E., & Roach, A. (1998). Liv-ing the arts through language and learning: Areport on community-based youth organiza-tions. Americans for the Arts Monographs,2(7), 1-20.

Heath, S.B., & Smyth, L. (1999). ArtShow:Youth and community development – Aresource guide. Washington, DC: Partners forLivable Communities.

Hetland, L. (2000). Listening to musicenhances spatial-temporal reasoning. TheJournal of Aesthetic Education, 34(304), 179-238.

Horn, J. (1992). An exploration into the writingof original scripts by inner-city high schooldrama students. New York, NY: National ArtsEducation Research Center. National Endow-ment for the Arts/United States Department ofEducation.



REFERENCES

Horowitz, R. (2004). Summary of large-scalearts partnership evaluations. Washington, DC:Arts Education Partnership.

Horowitz, R. & Webb-Dempsey, J. (2002).Promising signs of positive effects: Lessonsfrom the multi-arts studies. In R. Deasy (Ed.),Critical links: Learning in the arts and studentacademic and social development. Washing-ton, DC: Arts Education Partnership.

House, E. (1998). Schools for sale: Why freemarket policies won’t improve America’sschools, and what will. New York, NY:Teacher’s College Press.

Ingersoll, R.M. (2001). Teacher turnover andteacher shortages: An organizational analysis.American Educational Research Journal, 38(3),499–534.

Johnson, N. (1980). The material culture ofpublic school classrooms: The symbolic inte-gration of local schools and national society.Anthropology and Education Quarterly, 11,173-190.

Kindler, A.L. (2002). Survey of the states’ lim-ited English proficient students and availableeducational programs and services: 1999-2000 report. Washington, DC: GeorgeWashington University and National Clearing-house for English Language Acquisition andLanguage Instruction Educational Programs.

Mandell, J., & Wolf, J.L. (2003). Acting learningand change: Creating original plays with ado-lescents. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

McKinney, M. (2002). Space matters: The A+Schools Program and the ABCs of education.Educational Foundations, 16(2), 77-91.

McLaughlin, M. (2000). Community counts:How youth organizations matter for youthdevelopment. Washington, DC: Public Educa-tion Network.

McLaughlin, M., & Talbert, J. (2001). Profes-sional communities and the work of highschool teaching. Chicago, IL: University ofChicago Press.

National Center for Educational Statistics(2002). Arts education in public elementaryand secondary schools: 1999-2000. NCES2002131. Washington, DC: National Centerfor Educational Statistics.

National Center for Educational Statistics(1995). Arts education in public elementaryand secondary schools: 1995. NCES 95082.Washington, DC: National Center for Educa-tional Statistics.

National Center for Educational Statistics(1998). Eighth-Grade findings from theNational Assessment of Educational Progress:The NAEP 1997 arts report card. Washington,DC: National Center for Educational Statistics.

National Center for Effective SchoolsResearch (1989). A conversation betweenJames Comer and Ron Edmunds. Dubuque,IA: Kendall/Hunt Publishing.

The National Commission on Excellence inEducation (1983). A nation at risk: The impera-tive for educational reform. Washington, DC:United States Department of Education.

The National Research Council - Committeeon a Framework and Long-term ResearchAgenda for International Comparative Educa-tion Studies. Chabbott, C & Elliott, E.J. (Eds.).(2003). Understanding others, educating our-selves: Getting more from internationalcomparative studies in education. Washing-ton, DC: The National Academies Press.

Noam, G. (1999). The psychology of belong-ing: Reformulating adolescent development.In A.H. Esman, L.T. Flaherty, & H.A. Horowitz(Eds.), Annals of the American Society of Ado-lescent Psychiatry (Adolescent PsychiatryDevelopmental and Clinical Studies, Volume24). Hillsdale, NJ: The Analytic Press.

Oreck, B. (2004). The artistic and professionaldevelopment of teachers: A study of teachers’attitudes toward and use of the arts in teach-ing. Journal of Teacher Education, 55(1), 55-69.

Perkins, D. (1994). The intelligent eye: Learningto think by looking at art. Los Angeles, CA: TheGetty Center for Education in the Arts.

Pink, W., & Noblit, G. (Eds.). (2004). Culturalmatters: Lessons from several successfulschool reform strategies. Cresskill, NJ: Hamp-ton Press.

Proshansky, E., & Wolfe, M. (1974). The physi-cal setting and open education. SchoolReview, 82, 556-574.

Putnam, R.D. (2000). Bowling alone: The col-lapse and revival of American community.New York, NY: Simon and Shuster.

Rauscher, F. et al. (1997). Music trainingcauses long-term enhancement of preschoolchildren’s spatial-temporal reasoning. Neuro-logical Research, 19(1), 2-7.

Rauscher, F., & Zupan, M. (2000). Classroomkeyboard instruction improves kindergartenchildren’s spatial-temporal performance: Afield experiment. Early Childhood ResearchQuarterly, 15(2), 215-228.

Remer, J. (1996). Beyond enrichment: Buildingeffective arts partnerships with schools andyour community. New York, NY: ACA Books.

Rohd, M. (1998). Theatre for community con-flict and dialogue. Portsmouth, NH:Heinemann Publishing.

Sarason, S. (1971). The culture of school andthe problem of change. Boston, MA: Allynand Bacon.

Scripp, L. (2002). An overview of research onmusic and learning. In R. Deasy (Ed.), Criticallinks: Learning in the arts and student aca-demic and social development. Washington,DC: Arts Education Partnership.

The Secretary’s Commission on AchievingNecessary Skills (SCANS) (1992). Learning aliving: A blueprint for high performance: ASCANS report for America 2000. Washington,DC: U.S. Department of Labor.

Seidel, S., Eppel, M., & Martiniello, M. (2001).Arts survive: A study of sustainability in artseducation partnerships. Cambridge, MA: Har-vard Project Zero.

Stevenson, L. (2004). The arts and schoolchange. Washington, DC: Arts Education Part-nership.

Schwartz, D.L., Bransford, J.D., & Sears, D. (Inpress). Efficiency and innovation in transfer. InMestre, J. (Ed.) Transfer of learning: Researchand perspectives. Greenwich, CT: InformationAge Publishing.

Tufte, E.R. (1983). The visual display of quanti-tative information. Cheshire, CT: GraphicsPress.

Tufte, E.R. (1998). Visual explanations: Imagesand quantities, evidence and narrative.Cheshire, CT: Graphics Press.

Wolf, D.P. (2000). Why the arts matter in edu-cation or just what do children learn whenthey create an opera. In E. Fiske (Ed.), Champi-ons of change: The impact of arts on learning.Washington, DC: Arts Education Partnershipand the President’s Committee on the Artsand the Humanities.

Wootton, K. (2004). Community this and com-munity that. In Smyth, L. & Stevenson, L. Youwant to be part of everything: The arts, com-munity, and learning. Washington, DC: ArtsEducation Partnership.


One Massachusetts Avenue, NW, Suite 700 Washington, DC 20001-1431

http://www.aep-arts.org

Arts Education Partnership


THE ARTS AND EDUCATION NEW OPPORTUNITIES … ARTS AND EDUCATION: NEW OPPORTUNITIES FOR RESEARCH Arts...

Documents

Transcript of THE ARTS AND EDUCATION NEW OPPORTUNITIES … ARTS AND EDUCATION: NEW OPPORTUNITIES FOR RESEARCH Arts...