Selfie Avatar:

The things that shape my identity as a teacher are my family.  I care about students because I care about my own children, I can relate to students because I relate to my kids.  I think being a parent gives you a great advantage as a teacher because you have your own practice versions at home.

When I think about what is an avatar, I am immediately picturing Avatar the movie, where the disabled man goes into virtual reality and lives a different life through his Avatar.  He does not want to come back out, and he has a vested interest in what is happening in this VR world.  I believe there is a sequel in the works.  So I guess an avatar is a character version of yourself, which is why I chose to change my family photos with an app called cartoon on my phone.  There was a free trial then a subscription (3.99 I believe) I will cancel before that happens.  I did feel I had to change the pictures in the collage so they looked more character like to be considered avatars.  I think they ended up more like paintings or drawings, but the whole image came across the way I wanted.

This weeks reading was very interesting.  I felt like every female, in every country could relate to this story in some way.  Liao talks about body image and societal norms in the online world, the way I remember chatting in high school.  The fact that she is struggling to create a gender neutral avatar (and her avatar is suffering) is a complex thought.  She at one time uses a snowman because she is at odds with the male/female body choices she is offered in this SL world.  “Still, I am happy to be a snowman, because I believe it helps to create space for imaging a self that may be different from my physical appearance” ( Liao pp 31).

Liao also talks about autoethnography.  She says “Autoethnography works to hold self and culture together. . . you come to understand yourself in deeper ways, and with understanding yourself comes understanding others” (pp 32).  I like this explanation, I have read this word many times, and I think this is the first time I understood what it meant.  So I am hoping to use autoethnography in my family life and in myself, to learn internally and project that learning to others as a future teacher.

References:

Liao, C. (2008). My metamorphic avatar journey (Links to an external site.). Visual Culture & Gender, 3, 30-39.

Arts-Based Research-Blog #2

I chose the article Reinventing the STEAM engine for Art + Design Education from the Art Education Journal.  This article talks about the overarching ideas the STEAM hopes to accomplish, but I was interested in the section that talked about Leonardo da Vinci as an original STEAM thinker.  I feel this part of the article aligned with our discussions this week on social justice activism in arts-based research.  Da Vinci was a man of many talents that ranged from “drafting, chemistry, metallurgy, metal working, plaster casting, leather working, mechanics and carpentry as well as the artistic skills of drawing, painting, sculpting and modeling” (Rolling, pp 5).  He was living at a time when all of these studies were not separate entities.  They were referred to as “natural philosophy” (Rolling pp 5).  Therefore, our idea of STEAM is just a resurgence of the past.

When reading Keifer-Boyd’s article on social justice activism, the section on arts-inquiry entitled Researching artist’s work/process seemed to fit with Da Vinci’s themes.  When we look at his art, sketches, notes, journals, etc, it is a view into a world of the past that we are trying to bring into the future.  I found this very interesting.  In the article by Rollings it stated ” Leonardo’s incisive studies of the workings of the human heart from the years 1511-1513 are said to astound cardiac surgeons even to this day” (pp 5).

Problem Statement:

The purpose of this study is to change my current STEM school into a STEAM school using research, collaboration with current STEM teacher, and changes in curriculum and schedule.  This will be conducted by myself, the current art teacher, who will become the STEAM coordinator in conjunction with the current STEM teacher.

Concept Map:

I used the website popplet to create my concept map.  In my concept map I used the following terms:

STEM to STEAM

Peer Teaching

Student Centered Learning

Respect

Responsibility

Experimentation

Teacher in a facilitator role

More technology

Connections to all subjects

Journaling/Reflecting

More time in schedule

Better connection with students

Fostering caring atmosphere

Better behavior

The concept map looks like this, and is linked below if this version is hard to read.

http://popplet.com/app/#/5667460

The key words and phrases used in this concept map are things that I hope to see change when the STEM to STEAM process is underway in my school.  For example, one of my phrases is better connection with students.  We have a school wide initiative to foster greater positive connection with students this school year, and as an art educator, I see eleven hundred students in a six day cycle.  It is hard for me to remember everyone’s name, let alone foster positive personal connections.  In our current STEM program, students go to STEM for fifteen days in a row, in which it is more feasible to make these personal connections and make better relationships with students.  I look forward to this change going forward.  Another change I see happening is teaching in a facilitator role, I currently teach many guided drawing and painting lessons, and I see that dynamic changing into a more student choice centered environment in the STEAM classroom.  I also hope to see greater positive behavior from students because they are intrinsically motivated to experiment and make their own mistakes and successes.  There is a lot more to learn and do here, but I find this very exciting!

References:

James Haywood Rolling Jr.. (2016) Reinventing the STEAM Engine for Art + Design Education. Art Education 69:4, pages 4-7.

Keifer-Boyd, K. (2011). Arts-based research as social justice activism: Insight, inquiry, imagination, embodiment, relationality. International Review of Qualitative Research, 5(1), 3-19.

It is the year 2045 and my classroom no longer exists.  My job now is to teach art completely online and to make this curriculum accessible for all grade levels in the elementary level.

In this posthuman world, where all students are more comfortable on a device than in front of other people, this new way of teaching just may work out.  Students have no more socialization in school, and everything is completely online.  Mobile devices have become household norms that have crossed every socio-economic boundary and now reside in every home in America.  Our society has become dependent on these technologies, and our students need them to learn in this modern society.

For my first attempt at complete online teaching, I have chosen to make an interactive watercolor manual for students.  This is available for download on all devices through school website login.  The manual starts with a supply list.  Supplies are optional, as students can choose to do all assignments digitally, or experiment with them on paper as well.  The interactive book starts with watercolor basics, how to mix colors, wet-on-wet technique and some basic solvent mixing.  Students will be able to watercolor an initial picture, then experiment by adding salt, oil, alcohol, etc to see different effects.  After this play stage, students are asked to make a final picture to be altered in some way with a solvent of their choice.  The interfaces in the manual will allow students to create many pictures, adding and deleting the ones that are not wanted.  A final picture will be uploaded to the school’s website for grading for art class.

In this interface it is important to think about what are the underlying “rules” in the computer programs that artists and art educators use?  In this specific program, the rules are there are no rules.  Students do what feels right to them.  The elements of play and experimentation are important elements in the success of this project.  The idea that they don’t have to create on paper if they don’t want to, kind of negates the idea that rules exist in this interface.

How does technology affect perceived boundaries between disciplines, maker/consumer, author/reader, artist/viewer, or public/private?  The idea that this entire encounter is online takes away the mess and the maker element of the art in my opinion, but this may be the future of art education, and as long as students are still subjected to this information, it is better than nothing at all.  The artist/viewer perspective may be broadened by the availability of art.  When you are making art digitally, it is quick and simple, therefore there is a lot more to look at, and a lot more to talk about.  That seems like a positive element to me when doing a class critique.

Students find this experimenting fun and exciting.  They ask many questions, and show excitement when the solvents are put onto the watercolors.  I remember back to my classroom days when students used to shriek with joy when we would use eyedroppers of alcohol to drop onto their watercolor and watch as the color did a tie dye effect right before their eyes.  I imagine they are making those same noises at home, and I even imagine some of them have taken out some watercolors and paper, and are experimenting in real life.  I hope so at least.

The questions I get from this assignment are very much the same as the classroom questions, Why does this happen?, How does this happen? Where did the color go?  These questions are exciting and then students get to dive into a new topic of science and chemical reactions.   They always find this fascinating, and want to mix together everything in sight (which I advise against in the physical sense, digitally-go for it)  That is one extreme advantage to the digital interface of chemical mixing, you cannot blow yourself up, or ruin your art, because you can always hit the reset button.

After reading multiple interpretations of action research, the definition seems best summed up in the quote from the editors introduction in the article by Buffington and McKay that says “Action research is a spiral process of research where the researcher observes a situation, identifies a problem, designs an intervention or new strategy, implements the new action, reflects on the intervention, then observes again beginning the cycle anew” (pp 243).

Basically, practicing teachers are in the best position to make change from the inside, where they identify an issue of concern, design a change, implement that change, then reflect to see how that change worked.  The idea that action research is a spiral or cycle is interesting.  I would say all research should be described this way, you find out information, reflect on it, then set out to change something, then repeat in a new way to make it even better.  I like the way this is worded, although I am not sure how it will play out in my action research plan.

Intersubjectivity and reflexitivity play a role in the researchers plan as well,  as the researcher must present an open, honest interpretation of where they are coming from and their own personal bias.

Issues of equity and social justice are areas that drive action research.  For example, one area I considered working on in my school was making a adapted art program in my school for special education students.  These students currently attend regular art class, and are at a severe disadvantage to their classmates as to what they are able to do in class.  With time constrains and class size, it is difficult to accommodate these needs, and these students would be better served in a class designed with adapted needs in mind.  But, my schedule is completely full, and when talking with admin about this problem, there is no good solution at this time.  I will keep pushing for this to become a reality throughout my career.  It is important to me that special education students get the same level of care and dedication that I give to all my other students.

I would like to base my action research plan on turning my STEM school into a STEAM school.  I think my one big question is how do I do this?  I have many other questions, such as; Am I actually changing things in my school, or is this a theoretical plan?  How will this impact my STEM teacher?  Do I need to present to the school board prior to next semester?  What exactly are we doing next semester in the final course?

In the visualization exercise, I see myself in my STEAM classroom in the role of a facilitator of learning rather than a lecturer.  I see students taking independent paths, and learning from each other as they explore art projects.  I see messes, mistakes, and hands-on learning.  I think the three things that are important in this new environment are:

1. Students are working more independently on projects, rather that being guided by me on what to draw, paint, etc.
2. My role has changed to facilitator, rather than lecturer, and guided step-by-step direction giver.
3. Mistakes are made, learned from, and changed to make a project better.

The object that I focus on is a beaker, I seem to be stuck on the science piece of this puzzle as an important faucet of STEAM.  I see some kind of colorful STEAM logo with science gasses comes out of it in all colors as our new school logo for this program.

If I understand the reading correctly, I will be taking on the role of participant researcher,as I will be conducting and participating in the changes being made to my curriculum.  I assume I will be working closely with my current STEM teacher, and my principal to implement these changes in my school.

References:

Keifer-Boyd, K. (2014). Critical action research activism: Social structure and human agency. In M. L. Buffington & S. Wilson McKay (Eds.), Practice theory: Seeing the power of teacher researchers (pp. 246-251). Reston, VA: The National Art Education Association.