36

CurriculumChange forthe21st
Century: VisualCulture
tn Art Education

KerryFreedman
NorthernlllinoisUniversity

Patricia
Stuhr
The OhioStateUniversitv

C U R R I C U L UAM
N DV I S U AC
L ULTURE

National and internationalart educatorshavebegunto move awayfrom the emphasison tradi-

tional fine artsdisciplinestoward a broaderrangeof visual artsand culfural issues(Ballengee-
Morris & Stuhr,2001:Barbosa.1991;Blandy,1994;Congdon,1991;Duncum,1990;Freed-
man, 1994,2000;Garber,1995:Garoian,1999;Hern6ndez, 2000;Hicks, 1990;Jagodzinski,
1997;Neperud,i995; Smith-Shank,1996: Tavin,2000).Thesecontributorsto the field have
arguedfor a transformationof art educationin responseto changingconditionsin the contem-
porary world where the visual arts, includin-epopular arts and contemporaryfine afi, are an
increasinglyimportantpart ofthe largervisualculturethat surroundsandshapesour daily lives.
In the processof this transformation.art educatorsarereplacingolder views of curriculumand
instructionwith an expandedvision of the place of visual arts in human experience.
The changein art educationhas historicalroots. From the beginningof public school art
educationin the late l9th century,a rangeof designforms havebeenincludedin the field. For
example,early art educationfocusedon industrialdrawingand handicrafts;children'sinterests
b e c a m e a t o p i c oaf r t e d u c a t i o n b y t h1e9 2 0 sa: r t i n d a i l y i i f e w a s a s l o g a n otfh e 1 9 3 0 s ; d u n n g
World War II, visual propagandawas taughtin school;and during the 1960s,crafts increased
in popularity.In the following 2 decades,a few art educatorsaddressedimportant issuesin
the usesof popularculture and mass-mediatechnologies,contextualizingthesein relation to
students'lives(Chalmers,1981;Grigsby,l9ll;Lanier,1969 1914 McFee& Degge,1977;
Neperud,1973lWilson& Wilson, 1977;Wilson,Hurwitz,& Wilson, 1987).
Substantialdifferencesexist between those roots of a generationor more ago and the
contemporarymovement.This is the case.in part, becausethe global virtual culture only
suggestedby theoristsbefore the availability of interactive,personalcomputersin the early
1980shasnow becomea reality with its associated proliferationof imagesanddesignedobjects.
The current transformation of art education is more than just a broal:nrng of curriculum
contentand changesin teachingstrategies in response to the immediacyand massdistribution

815
816 FREEDMANANDsTUHR

of imagery.It incluilesa new level of theorizingaboutart in educationthat is tied to emergent

postmodernphilosophiesbasedon this growing environmentof intercultural,intraculfural,and
transculturalvisualizations.
The shift to visualculturenot only refersto expandingtherangeof visual artsfoms included
in thecurriculumbut alsoto addressing issuesofimagery andartifactsthatdo not centeron form
per se.This includesissuesconcerningthe power of representation, the formation of cultural
identities,functionsof creativeproduction,the meaningsof visualnarratives,critical reflection
on technologicalpervasiveness, andthe importanceofinterdisciplinaryconnections.The focus
in recentdecadeson fine artsdisciplinesin U.S. art curriculum and standardizedtestinghave
resultedin the exclusionof suchcritical aspectsof visual culturein art education.In fact, these
aspectsof the visual arts havebeen given more attentionin "nonart" school subjectssuch as
anthropologyand sociologyandfeminist,cultural,and mediastudies(Collins, 1989;Mirzoeff,
1998;Scollon & Scollon, 1995;Sturken& Cartwright,2001). If the intentionof educationis
to preparestudentsfor personalfulfillment and to constructivelycontributeto society,then art
educationmust deal with newly emergingissues,problems,and possibilitiesthat go beyond
the constraintsof leaming offeredby a discipline-based curriculum and standardizedforms of
assessment.
The purposeof this chapteris to discussart educationin terms of the broadeningrealm
of visual culture and to theorizeabout curiculum change.The developmentof a conceptual
frameworkfor postmodernvisual cultureis vital to any contemporaryteachingwith a goal of
critical reflection.Although scholarsin art educationand other fields have begunto develop
theoreticalunderpinningsfor understandingvisual culture,the topic from an educationalper-
spectiveremainsseverelyundertheorized. As a result,much theoreticalwork needsto be done
in order to promoteappropriateinterpretationsand applicationsof visual culturein art educa-
tion. In this chapter,we havedrawn on scholarshipfrom inside and outsideof the field to lay
a foundationfor curriculum theory.In the following main section.we supportthe argument
for broadeningthe domainof art educationby presentingthe visual artsin their contemporary,
socioculturalcontext.After discussingthis contextof visual culture,we addressshiftsin recent
theory and practiceof arl educationin the secondmain section.

B R O A D E N I N GT H E D O M A I N O F A R T E D U C A T I O N

A globaltransformationof culturehasoccurredthatis dependenton visual imagesand artifacts

rangingfrom what we wearto what we watch.We live in an increasinglyimage-saturated world
where televisionnews may control a person'sknowledgeof current events,where students
spendmore time in front of a screenthan in front of a teacher,and where newbom babies are
shownvideosto activatestill-developingneurons.Visual cultureis pervasiveandit reflects,as
well as influences,generalculturalchange.The pervasiveness of visual cultural forms and the
freedomwith which theseforms crossvarioustypes of traditionalborderscan be seenin the
use of fine art icons recycledin advertising,computer-generated charactersin films, and the
inclusionof rap videosin museumexhibitions.The visual artsarethe major part of this larger
visual culture that includes fine art, advertising,folk art, television and other performance
arts,housingand appareldesign,mall and amusementpark design,and other forms of visual
production and cotnmunication.Anyone who travels,watchesrock videos, sits on a chair,
entersa building, or surfsthe Web experiencesthe visual arts.Visual culture is the totality of
humanly designedimagesand arlifactsthat shapeour existence.
The increasingnumberof visual culture objectsand imagesshapesnot only art education
in the 2lst century but also the intergraphicaiand intertextualconnectionsbetween visual
forms (Freedman,2000, 2003). The conceptualand physical interactionsof various images
and artif'acts,forms of representation,and their meaningsarefundamentalto the way in which

:;tm
 36. CURRICULLTMCHANGEFORTHE2lSTCENTURY
817

the visual arts are interpretedand understood.Art now crossesmany old bordersof culture
and form. For example,advertising photography,body fluids, and Star Wars paraphernaliaare
all exhibitedin art museums.As a result,knowledgeof what hastraditionallybeenconsidered
f,ne art objects and "good" tastecan no longer be seenas the only visual cultural capital to
serveelementary,secondary,or higher educationstudents.Fine art is still of great value in
educationand an imporlant part of historical and contemporaryvisual culture; however,the
broader,creative,and critical explorationof visual culture, and its local, state,national,and
globalmeaningsis a more appropriatefocus if we want studentsto understandthe importance
of visual culture.
In this sectionof the chapter,we discussfour conditionsof the contemporaryworld that
contextualizeart educationand lead to changesin the productionand study of visual culture
by students.First, imporlant characteristicsof personaland communalidentitiesarediscussed
in terms of representations constructedin and through the range of visual culture. Second,
increasingdaily interactionswith newermedia,particularlyvisual technologies,are addressed
as a major part of contemporaryhuman experience.Third, the permeablequality of disci-
plinary boundariesand the significanceof interdisciplinaryknowledgeto the complexity of
visualculturearediscussed.Fourth,the importanceof critical processes of interpretationin un-
derstandingthe complexity of visual culture is presented.Although, we havedelineatedthese
conditionsinto sectionsfor this chapter,the contentsofthesesectionsactuallyblur andinteract.

SociallssuesandCulturalldentities
At one time, sociologiststhoughtpopular forms of visual culture merely reflectedsocial life.
Contemporaryimages and artifacts.however,are a major part of social life. Visual culture
teachespeople (evenwhen we are not consciousof being educated)and, in the process,we
recreateourselvesthrough our encounterswith it. As we learn, we change,constructingand
reconstructingourselves.Global culture functions through visual culture (television,radio,
newspapers, telephones,faxes,World Wide Web, etc.)to producehegemonic,virnral realities,
including our socialconsciousness and identities.
The influenceof visual cultureon identity occurson personalandcommunallevels.Various
aspectsof personalidentity are made up of many cultural bits. Culture is a collage of many
cultural identitiesthat are selectedand translatedon a continuingbasis (Clifford, 1988).Far
from being a unifiedwhole, any particularidentity is a combinationof others,with its resulting
contradictionsand incongruities.These identitiesinclude age, gender,and/or sexuality,so-
cioeconomicclass,exceptionality(giftedness,differently ab1ed,health),geographiclocation,
language,ethnicity,race,religion, and political status.
All we can everunderstandof a cultural group is basedon individual, temporalexperience
aslived or expressed. Fragmentedknowledgeof identity is all that can exist,making it difficult
to understandevenour own culturesand socialgroups.However,the more that is learnedabout
visual culture, ihe better we can grasp the conceptof identity; and the more that is leamed
aboutthe variousmembersof a particulargroup,the morerichly we can understandtheir visual
culture (Stuhr, 1999).A recognitionof our own socioculturalidentitiesand biasesmakesit
easierto understandthe multifacetedidentitiesof others.It alsohelpsus to understandwhy and
how studentsrespondto visual cultureas they do (Ballengee-Morris& Stuhr,2001; Freedman
& Wood. 1999).
Communal identity is constructedby socialgroupsat the international,national,regional,
stateor province,county, and local community levels where institutions,laws, and policies
interact and change.These communal levels are continually being cot,itructed and recon-
structedin accordancewith sociopoliticalpositions.Con.munalidentity is an importantcon-
ceptual site where cultural beliefs and values are formed, sanctioned,and/or penalized as it
mediatesthe uncertaintyand conflict of daily life and change.
818 FREEDMANANDSTUHR

Global visual cuhrrreis createdthroughcommodificationand distributedat an international

level. The merchandiseof global visual culture has expandedbeyond productsto ideology,
spirituality,and aesthetics.This merchandizingcan be a useful tool when cooptedfor positive
educationalpurposes,such as for saving endangeredspecies,protecting the environment,
or promoting human rights; however,it can have negativeeffectsas well when it colonizes,
stereotypes, anddisenfranchises. As a resultofthe expanding,globalinfluenceofvisual culture
in the formation of identity and lived experience,art educationhas a new global significance.
Through lived experiencewith the increasingrange,availability,and speedof visual forms,
many art educatorshave come to understandthat visual culture is in a continual state of
becomingand shouldbe taughtas such.

VisualTechnologies
A cntical issue of visual culture is the place of visual forms producedthrough the use of
computerand other advancedtechnologies.Computertechnologyis not only a medium but
also a meansthat hasenabledpeopleto seethingspreviouslyunimaginedand to crossborders
of form from the flne arts to the massmedia to scientific visualization.Visual technologies
allow peopleto create.copy,project,manipulate,erase,and duplicateimageswith an easeand
speedthat challengesdistinctionsof talent,technique,and the conceptuallocationof form. It
could be arguedthat many of the issuesthat are seenas critical to postmodernvisual culture
haveexistedhistoricallyin otherforms; however,the global technologicalpresenceof images
and objects,the easeand speedwith which they can be producedand reproduced,and the
power of their pervasiveness demandseriousattentionin education'
Contemporary visual technologies havepromotedthe collapseof boundariesbetweened-
ucationand entertainment. Advertisements, Web sites,and eventhe news,combineeducation
and entertainment to promote the sale if products and/or ideas. Consumers are approached
as audiencesthroughthe instantaneous transmission of soundand imagery to even the most
remote areas.Goods and ideasare pitched under the guise of enjoyableand addicting enter-
tainment.This edu-tainmenthasfictional qualitiesthat havebecomean importantpart of daily
reality and the sensualqualitiesof the imagery are as seductiveas they are didactic. It is the
wide distributionof this interactionof seduction, information, and representationthat makes
newervisual technologiesso powerful.
Although experienceswith visual technologieswere once consideredan escapeinto a
fictional, virtual world, studentsusing technology today are understoodas engaging with
complex, global communitiesat multiple cognitive levels. We now experiencetechnology
as reality and appropriatevisual culture as life experience,turning it into attitudes,actions,
and evenconsclousness (Rushkoff,1994).While we arebeing shapedby technologicalvisual
culture,we shapeit throughour fashion,toy, music, and other preferences.Corporationsand
advertisingagenciesvideotapestudentsin teen culture focus groups,who act as informants
on the next "hot" or "cool" thing, which are then developedinto products.The productsare
subsequentlyadvertisedand sold inside, as well as outside,of school to their peersthough
global visual technologies.The processillustratesone of the parts visual technologiesplays
in the fusion of educationand entertainmentas well as in the collapseof boundariesbetween
studentculture and corporateinterests.
Visual culture forms are merging. Rarely do contemporaryartists specializein painting
on canvasor sculptingin marblel paintersdo performanceart; actorsdo rock videos; video
artistsrecyclefilm clips; filmmakersuse computergraphics,which are adaptedfor toys and
T-shirt advertising;and advertisersappropriatepaintings. Today's visual arts have moved
beyond painting and sculptureto include computer graphics,fashion design, architecture'
environmentaldesign,television,comics and cartoons,magazineadvertisements, and so on'
 FORTHE21STCENTTIRY 819
CHANGE
36. CURzuCULLM

Visualculturealsooverlapswith artsnot usualiycategorizedasvisual,suchasdanceandtheater.

Performanceartistsof many typesuse cornputerizedlighting and soundto createatmospheric
and dramatic effects.The performing arts are part of visual culture.Even music has become
more visual throughthe increaseduse of rock videos and complex technologicallyproduced
light shows during concerts.Through the use of technology,such as computergraphicsand
audio software,art objects have increasinglybecomerecycledbits of other objectsthat are
collaged,reconstructed,and reproduced.
In the processof changing the visual arts, advancedtechnologieshave changedwhat it
meansto be educatedin the arts.In the contextofpostindustrializedculture,the visual artscan
no longer be seenas isolatedfrom generalculture,the productsof a few alienated,individual
artistsworking in a small fine art community of museums,collectors,and galleries.Museum
or gallery exhibition contactwith original fine art objectsis now only one of many possible
experienceswith the visual arts.Newer technologieshaveenabledencounterswith the visual
arts to becomeembeddedin all aspectsof our daily iives.

Permeable Arenas of Knowledge

It is becoming more difficuit to distinguish the fine arts from other aspectsof visual cul-
ture becausethe qualitativedifferencesamong theseforms havebecomeless discrete.Visual
culture is a mode of experiencethat connectspeople through many and varied mediators.
The variety and complexity of the experienceare dependenton the possibility of a range
of quaLitl,relatedto form, none of which shouid be inherentlyexcludedfrom the investiga-
tion, analysis,and critique enabledby aft education.Even conceptsand objects previously
consideredfairly stable are in flux. Truth has sh,rftedfrom an epistemologicalto an on-
tological issue:That is, it becomesiess about what we know than who we are. Time has
lost its neat linearity, spaceappearsto expandand contract,and boundariesof various sorts
havebecomeblurred.Perhapsmost important,postmodernvisual culture makesimperativea
connectedness that underminesknowledge as traditionally taught in school. It involves in-
teractions among people,cuitures,forms of representation,and professionaldisciplines.As
suggested earlier, this condition has been particularly promoted through the use of visual
technologies.
In light of thesecontemporaryconditions,it seemslessimportantthan it oncewas to focus
determinationsof either worthinessof studyor quality of objectin educationon distinctionsof
tasteor between"high" and "low" arts.Such distinctionsmay be important to understanding
someaspectsof artisticpractice,suchas privatecollecting,museumexhibition,and the useof
fine art in advertising.Thesedistinctionsofvisual form havelong beenbasedon socioeconomic
differences and are therefore contral)' to the democraticpurposesof schooling' Although such
distinctions might be understandableas boundariesof professionaltraining in a period of
increasingspecialization,we now live in a time that includesimportantchallengesto extreme
specialization.Suchchallengesaremadeby evenhighly specializedprofessionalswho realize
that solving the most seriousand importantproblemsof the world demandinterdisciplinary
and cross-disciplinaryknowledge.
The realm of the visual arts inherently overlapswith other disciplinary domains.Artists
and other culturalproducersdraw on all typesofknowledge and cognitiveprocessesto create.
Recentresearchon cognition, and evenpredictionsby iabor leaders,suggeststhat learningin
the future will havemore to do with developinga rangeof knowledgethat involvesdisciplinary'
interdisciplinary,and interpersonalrelationshipsthan with the boundariesof professionaldis-
ciplines (Solso, 1997).Connectingcontenttypically consideredPart cfother school subjects
irrthe curriculum helps sfudentsto understandthe importanceand power of the visual culture
and their placein the world.
820 FREEDMANAND STUHR

Complexity
of Un,:lerstanding
Processes
As a pafi of the processof conceptformation in education,the arts have often been dichoto-
mously categorized,inhibiting understandingand reducing the complexity of visual culture.
The processof learning new conceptsdoes involve dichotomousdistinctions.For example,
childrenwith petsmay begin to learn that a cow is a cow by learningthat is not a dog or a cat;
they learnto discernone styleof paintingby learningits differencesfrom otherstyles(Gardner,
1972).However,if attemptsto understandvisual culture are successful,the dichotomiesof
early conceptformation are overcome,the complexity of conceptsbecomesincreasinglyap-
parent,categoriesblur, and hard and fast distinctionsbecomeless discrete.At this level of
understanding, oppositionsbecomedualisms("two sidesof the samecoin"), multiple perspec-
tives are valued,and oversimplifications(such as stereotypes)are replacedby more complex
representations.
Contemporaryvisual culture is too complex to be representedin a dichotomousfashion.
The complexitiesare illustratedby practicessuchas imagerecycling,the difficultiesof defin-
ing creativity as originality, and the effectsof maintainingconceptualoppositions(including
distinctionssuchasfine vs. populararls and malevs. femalecapabilities).As discussedearlier,
it is not easy to view culturesor their creationsas totally separatebecausethey interacton
many levels and through many media. Fine artists borrow imagery from popular culture, men
borrow from women, and artistsin one country borrow from thosein other countries.These
intersectionsare revealedand supportedin and throughvisual cultural forms.
An increasingbody of contemporarytheory and artistic practicerepresentsthe seductive
infusionof meaningin aestheticsasthe power of visual culture(e.g.,Ewen, 1988;Shusterman,
1989). The integral relationshipbetween deep meaning and surfacequalities is one of the
reasonsthat visual culture is so complex. It is not the surfacequalities of form that make
art worth teachingin academicinstitutions;rather,it is the profound and complex qualities,
basedon their social and cultural contextsand meanings,that are attachedto forms. In part'
postmodernvisual culture producersof various types reflect and enable this refocusingof
aesthetictheory.They often rejectformalistic usesof the elementsand principlesof designin
favor of symbolic usesthat suggestmultiple and extendedsocial meanings.
Making meaningfrom complexvisual culturalforms occursthrough at leastthreeoverlap-
ping methods:(a) cornmunication,(b) suggestiort,and (c) appropriation (Freedman,2003)'
Communicationinvolves a fairly direct line of thought betweenthe maker and the viewer'
The makerhas a messagethat sheor he intendsfor viewersto understand,and the messageis
conveyedin as directa manneraspossibleto an intendedandunderstoodaudience.Suggestion
involvesa processby which associationis stirnulatedin viewersby a maker (whetherintended
or not), resulting in the extensionof meaning beyond the work. Appropriation involves the
creativeinterpretationby a viewer who encountersa visual culture form in which the maker
has intentionallydiffusedmeaning.In a sense,viewerscornpleteany work of art by drawing
on their prior knowledgeand experiencesas they constructmeaning.However,contemporary
visualcultureis often complexbecausepostmodemartistsdeliberatelyconfoundthe construc-
tion of meaning.These conditionsillustrate the importanceof teaching visual culture as a
processof creativeand critical inquiry.

NEW APPROACHES TO ART EDUCATION:

V I S U A L C U L T U R EI N Q U I R Y

In part, visual culture inquiry challengestraditionalforms of art educationbecauseit is sen-

sitive to the social and cultural issuesdiscussedin the previous section.The foundationof
art educationconceptualizedas visual culture inquiry is a matter of teachingfor life in and
 36. CURRICULUMCHANGEFORTHE2ISTCENTURY
821

through the visual arIs. It helps studentsto recognizeand understandthe ambiguities,con-

Tlicts, nuances,and ephemeralquaiitiesof socialexperience,much of which is now configured
through imagery and designedobjects.
In part,freedomin contemporarydemocraciesis reflectedthroughthe ways in which visual
realitiesareconstructed,cutting acrosstraditionalartisticand socialboundaries.Studentsand
teachersare becoming aware of the power of visual culture in the formation of attitudes,
beliefs. and actions.ln dynamic ways, visual culture shapesthe ways we look at ourselves
and perceive others, often portraying individuals and groups in ways contradictoryto the
democraticpurposesof schooling.At the sametime, educationis one of the last public forums
for a potentiallyfree critiqueof the productsof massdistnbutedvisual technologiesthat make
up the media and visual culture and for thoughtful studentreflectionon their own production
and usesof visual culture.The critical necessityof teachingvisual culture in this context is
seenin the lack of seriousdebateevenin the "free" media as it becomesincreasinglyfocused
on entertainment(e.g.,Aronowitz, 1994;Morley,1992).
Perhapsthe peoplemostinfluencedby visual culturearechildrenand adolescents. Students
incorporatethe socialcodes,language,and valuesofvisual cultureinto their lives (Freedman&
Wood, 1999;Tavin,2001).Visual cultureinfluencesstudents'knowledge,affectstheir identity
construction,and shapestheir aestheticsensibilities.
In the following sections,we flrst arguethe importanceof moving from a schoolfoundation
of modernistaestheticpolicy basedon industrial training to a more meaningfuland relevant
art education.Second,we discussproblemsof atomizingvisual culture in curriculum.Third,
we focus on teachingas a processof helping individualsand learningcommunitiesto make
meaningthroughthe fusion of creativeand critical inquiry.

Modernist
Reconceptualizing Aesthetic
Policy:
Art Education
Training
to Industrial
Responds
An uns.tated aestheticpolicy hasdevelopedthroughthe educationalapplicationof an aesthetic
canonthat underliesall of what we do. As policy, the canonhascalcifiedand reproduceditself,
throughcentury-longpracticesof schooling.Like any educationalpolicy, this aestheticpolicy
implies a socialcontractthat is revealedthroughthe modernist,industrialcuniculum and stan-
dardizedteststakenby studentsand teachers.It is a historicalartifactthat was importantin its
time for the developmentof the visual artsin the United Statesand,in public schoolart educa-
tion, hasbeenbasedon industrialdesignat leastsinceWalterSmith'swork in the 1870s.Times
havechanged,however,andthe contractis being renegotiated. The new perspectiveofart edu-
cation respondsto contemporarychangein what studentsneedto know in and through the arts.
The industrialtraining model of educationcarrieswith it regimented,mechanistictraining
and the reproduction of traditional forms of knowledge through group conformity. As a result,
studentsworking within this model often make arl that looks very much alike. Theseassembly-
line-lookingproducts,suchascolor wheels,areproducedby rote andrepeatedin multiple grade
levels.The emphasison this model hasenabledthe developmentof the schoolart style(Efland,
1916, 1983) and has cramped teacher and student freedom in the exploration of conceptual
complexity in both making and viewing. Of course,sometechnicalexercisesare importantto
art education,but to emphasizethis model of instructionconfoundsthe importanceof art.
Like other school subjects,art educationadoptedindustrialtraining as its basic approach
in the late 19th century.Today,the businesscommunity has changedfrom a focus on modem,
industrial production techniquesto postmodernmarket information and services,in which
home loansand vacationscan be bought on the Web, children learn aboutouter ri)acethrough
role-play computergames,and peopleaccessmapsthroughsatelliteconnectionsin their cars.
As discussedearlier, the history of art educationis replete with examplesof the inclusion
822 F'REEDMANAND STUHR

of popular culture lrnagesand objects.The current movementleavesbehind the technical

emphasisof industrial training that alienatesproducersfrom the larger meaningsassociated
with their production.Insteadit givesattentionto the multiple connectionsbetweenform and
meanlng.
The industrialmodel in art educationis basedon analyticalaesthetics.This aestheticper-
spectivehasbeentreatedin curriculumas ifit is objective:That is, analyticalaestheticsis not
generallytaughtasif it were a sociallyconstructedand culturallylocatedphilosophicalstance.
In curiculum, the analyticemphasisis formalism.Formalismis a pseudoscientific conception
of aestheticsthat developedin the late 19thand early 20th centuryat a time when sciencewas
gainingcurrencyin applicationto all areasof sociallife. Other conceptionsof aestheticsexist
but havelargely beenignoredas philosophicalanalysisin art education.
Even when the focus of instruction is not formal per se (that is, when formal qualities
are understoodas supportsfor ideas)the educationalpresentationof formal qualities is not
always responsiveto social and cultural issues.Consider the example of frontal views of
authority figures,which is often included as part of the aestheticcanon studentsmust learn.
Not only is this conceptrelatively trivial in the big picture of the small amount of time we
haveto teachstudents,but alsoit is Eurocentric.In certainAfncan cultures,authorityhasbeen
representedtraditionallyin femalerelief form in which its femaleness(protrudingbreastsand
buttocks)is intendedto be viewed from the side.Another instancewhere the Westerncanon
of pictorial frontal views of authority does not hold up is in the context of traditional Plains
NativeAmericanshieldsandteepeeswhereauthorityf,guresarerepresented aspartof symbolic
narratives. Their authoritymight be recognized by headgear, size,and so on. Even in European
art, the authorityof malefigureshasbeensymbolicallyshownby uniforms,weapons,and even
by connectionto a spouseas in a pair of profile portraits.Theseexamplesillustratethat the
focusof curriculummust changeif studentsareto developan understandingof the complexity
of thoughtconcerningvisual imagery and artifacts.
The traditionalfocus on historical,flne art exemplarshas tendedto suggesta single line of
Westernstylistic development.Formal and technicalqualities have been representedin cur-
riculum as the most importantconnectionbetweenart objects.Even the educationalemphasis
of content,such as the figure, landscape,or still life, has often becomeformal and technical
when teachersassignstudentsto "make a Van Gogh sunflowerpainting" with paperplatesand
dry markers.In the past, the rich conceptualconnectionsamong images,objects,and other
forms of culture,which are often their reasonsfor being, havebeenmissedor hidden in such
endeavors.The complex,interdisciplinaryreasonswe value suchartists' ideasare neglected.
Under theseconditions,visual cultureobjectsaretransformedthrougheducation,often losing
importantattachedcultural meanings.

as Process:
Curriculum Atomistic
Challenging Content
andAssessment
Recently,generalcurriculum theoristshavebeenstrugglingwith the project of reconceptual-
izing curiculum from postmodernperspectives(Giroux, 1992;Pinar, 1988;Pinar,Reynolds,
Slattery,& Taubman,1996).This projectis a responseto the many socialandcultural changes
that are now influencing students'lives. The project of developingappropriateeducational
responsesto suchchangeis increasinglyimportantas societiesand culturesleavethe secure
thinking of modernisticforms of education,where knowledgeand inquiry methodsare rep-
resentedas stableand curriculum is intendedto be reproductive.For example,postmodem
curiculum theoristspoint out that curriculum is not a neutralenterprise;it is a matter of se-
lection. As a result, curriculum containsand reflectsthe interestsof individuals and social
 36. CURRICULUX4CHANGEFORTTIE2lSTCENTURY
823

groups.Patrick Slattery(1995) has arguedthat curriculum expressesautobiographybecause

it is createdby human beings who leave parts of themseh'esin their teachingand writing.
He has suggestedthat curriculum should focus on issuesof the self, becausethat is where
learning takes place, and he arguesthat educatorscan use the conceptof autobiographyto
better understandeducationalconditions.A postmodernunderstandingof the personaland
social processesof curriculum planning and enactmentexemplifiesthe aestheticcharacterof
educationand the importanceof consideringindividual learningin relationto socialcontexts.
The modernistproblem of curriculum may be thought of as havin-qallowed a veil to fall
over such social issues,hidrng or obscuringthem. Thrs veil has coveredthe complexity and
connectionsof artisticrelationshipsas modernistcurriculuurhas soughtto continuallybreak
down knowledgeinto minute bits of infomation. As the curriculumhasbecomemore focused
on small objectivesandtraditional,fine art exemplarsareusedoverandover again,art hasbeen
transformedfrom visual expressionsof multiple and complex ideasto oversimplifiedusesof
formal and technicalqualities.
The postmodernproblem of curriculum is to lift the veil and thus make art educationmore
meaningfulthanmeresensoryexperience.This could be accomplishedby challengingstudents
with inquiry basedon creativeproductionand critical reflectioninvolving deepinterrogations
of images,artifacts,and ideasthat approachthe compiexity of visual culture as experienced.
This often requiressomeschool subjectintegration.
The major issueof curriculum integrationnow can no longer be whetherto integrate,but
rather what, when, and how to teach studentsmost eft-ectivelythrough the constructionof
integratedknowledge.Schoolsare adoptingintegratedapproachesto curriculum in an effort
to teach studentsthe conceptualconnectionsthey need to succeedin contemporarylife. Art
educationshould help studentsknow the visual arts in their integrity and complexity,their
conflicting ideasas well as their acceptedobjects,and their connectionsto social thought as
well as their connectionsto other professionalpractices.
As discussedearlier.confining the visual artsto narrow learningobjectivesand assessment
strategiesbasedon traditionalnotionsof excellencein fine art disciplinesis highly problematic.
The old constructsof knowledgeabout the visual arts haveincluded at leastone other set of
boundariesthat hasresultedin difficultiesfor an art education.lt involvesthe question:Where
do the boundariesof art stop and other schooisubjectsbegin?Reproducingnalrow constructs
of knowledgeshould not be the purposeof contemporaryart education.Not only is finding
a perimeter for the open concept of art difficult. but also it may be an ineffective way to
approachcurriculum. From a contemporaryeducationalstandpoint,our goal is to make as
many connectionsas possibiebecauseconnectionsproduceintegratedlearning.
In order to reconceptualize curriculum in this way, it is necessaryto understandcurriculum
as a processratherthan as a single text. The processof curriculum is its product.Curriculum
is not a unified whole. It is a collage of bits of information basedon knowledge(Freedman,
2000,2003).It is flexible,at sornetimessequentialandat othertimeshighly interactive,making
connectionsnot only to the previouslessonbut also to life experiences.
An integralrelationshipexistsbetweenassessment and curriculum.Both mustbe of quaiity
in order to havea successfulprogram.An authenticperspectiveof assessment and curriculum
is to developboth through community discourse.Criteria for assessment must be developed
throughcommunity debate,but not allowed to be trivialized throughexcessivefragmentation
and overassessment (Boughton, 1991, 1997').
Art educationis no different in the dissolution of its boundariesfrom other areasand
disciplines.Postmodernismand advancesin computerand media technologieshave enabled
boundary erosion that has prompted new ways of conceptualizimgsubject areasand what
constitutesimportantdrsciplinaryknowledge.As a result,new methodsfor investigationand
824 FREEDMANANDsTUHR

data collection elr- continually being invented and developed.The arts figure prominently in
thesenew methodologicalconfigurations(Barone& Eisner, 1997; Gaines & Renow, 1999:
Prosser,1998;Rose,2001).

ArtisticProduction:
MakingMeaning
ThroughCreative
andCriticalInquiry
In the past,the focus on formal and technicalattributesof production haslimited our conception
of curriculumandhasbeenconstrainedby at leastfour interconnecting,historicalfoundations.
First, there has been a focus on realistic representationas a major criterion for quality in
student art. Teachersoften cite parent and administrative pressure for this focus. A focus
on realism,without conceptualfoundation,addresses only one form of artisticproductionand
ignoresthe importanceof abstractand symbolic representationsof ideasthat arevital to human
experience.Creativeand critical probleminvestigationand productionbasedon variousforms
of abstraction,fantasy,science-fiction,and so on can only be promotedthroughopen-ended,
independentinquiry leadingto connectiveforms of representation.
Second,in conflict with the focus on realism,but coexistingwith it is an emphasison ex-
pressionisticcharacteristics and maintainingchildlike qualitiesin studentart.This hasresulted
in productsthat haveformal and technicalqualitiesthat look somewhatlike young children's
art regardlessof the conceptualsophisticationof the student.The painterly quality of child
art is valuedas evidenceofindividual self-expression (in part,basedon fine art stylessuchas
abstractexpressionism)and is a foundationof the aestheticof late modernism.However,these
expressionisticqualitiesare not necessarilyevidenceof individuality becausethey havebeen
socially constructedand havebecomea criterion for group assessment.
Third, as discussedearlier,the industrialtraining model has led to a focus on formal and
technicalqualities,but theseare also easy to teach and assess.Curriculum contentis often
selectedand configuredto be efficiently handled in the instirutionalizedsettingsof class-
rooms. With the emphasison standardizedcurriculum and testing,the relianceon simplistic,
easily observedproducts or results and proceduresis convenient.Although thesepractices
often trivialize art and are generally irrelevant to students' lives, they are consideredefficient
and effectiveby administrativeand governingbodies,and teachershave beenencouragedto
perpetuatethesepractices.
Fourth, art teachersare forced to compete for funds and advocatefor programsthrough art
exhibitions for parents and administratorswho are not well educatedin the arts. As a result,
teachersare often placedin a positionof defendingtheir placein the schoolcommunitybased
on the successof exhibitions,which dependon a studentart aestheticthat demonstratesa
high degreeof formal and technicalskrll, but is not intellectually demanding.Rather than
acknowledgingthat art involvesa rangeof life issues,abilities,and concepts,art teachershave
beenpressuredto think that their worth is basedon students'technicalproductionskills and
knowledge of a few art historical facts.
The new conceptionof curriculumand studentartisticinquiry opensup the possibilityof
moving away from theseproblems.A curriculum basedon visual culture takesinto consid-
eration students'daily, postmodernexperiencesand their future lives. Most studentswill not
be professionalartists,but all studentsneed to becomeresponsiblecitizensof the world. In
a democracy,an aim of educationis to promotethe developmentof responsiblecitizenswho
think cntically, act constructivelyin an informed manner.and collaboratein the conscious
formation of personal and communal identities. ln order for art curriculum to fulfill this aim
in the contemporarycontext,students'studio experiencemust be thought of as part of visual
culture and as a vital way to come to understandthe visual mrlieu in which thev live. Student
 36, CURRICULUMCHANGEFORTHE 21STCENTURY 825
studio experienceis essentialto teachingand learning about visual culture becauseit (a) is
a processof creative/criticalinquiry, (b) helps studentsunderstandthe complexitiesof visual
culture,and (c) connectsand empowerspeople.

Artistic Production ls a Process of Creative/Critical inquiry

Creativeproductionand critical reflectionare not separatein art; they are dualisticand mutu-
ally dependent.Creativeproductionis inherentlycritical, and critical reflectionis inherently
creative.When we look at an imageor artifact,we createit in the sensethat we give it meaning.
It is important to conceptualizetheseprocessesas being interconnectedif art educatorsare
going to teachin ways appropriateto understandingvisual culture.
Many differenttypesof studios(i.e.,commercialarts,fine arts,computergraphics,videoand
film production)and studiopracticesexist.Studiopracticesinclude concepfualizing,viewing,
analyzing,judging, designing,constructing,and marketingvisual forms.An importantparr of
studiopracticeis participationin the discoursesof variouscommunities(professional,student,
ethnic, gender,environmental,etc.) to develop contextsthrough which connectionscan be
made betweenproduction and social life. As discussedearlier, a critical aspectof teaching
visual culture is making connectionsand crossing borders. This is accomplishedthrough
conceptuallygroundedprocessesof creative/criticalinquiry that promote synthesis,extend
knowledge,andenrichrelationships.Thesearethepowersof the artsandvital aspectsof studio
production.Conceptuallygroundedproductionprocessescrossover traditionalboundariesof
form, breaking down old borders of media-driven curriculum, and turning curriculum upside-
down, so thatthe developmentofideas aregiven attentionfirst andthe techniquesandprocesses
emergeas the expressionof thoseideas.In this way, techniqueand media are relatedto and
enhancethe making of meaning in creative/critical inquiry. Visual culture is an expressionof
ideasthroughthe use of technicaland formal processes,but theseprocessesare not the main
purposeof artisticproduction.
Creative/criticalinquiry is not only for secondarylevel students;in fact, it should begin
at the elementarylevel. Young studentsare already adopting postmodernvisual culture as
a framework for understandingreality outside of school. For instance,elementarystudents
analyze,role-play,draw, and constructenvironmentsbasedon the Harry Potterbooks, films,
and toys from interdisciplinaryperspectivesof casting,acting, designing,costumestyling,
narration,and mechanization.

MakingVisualCultureCan HelpStudentsGrasp
Complexitiesof Culture
Traditionally, aft hasbeenrepresentedin educationasinherently good. The term arr hascarried
with it assumptionsof quality,value,andenrichment.However,the visualartsarenot inherentl-v
good. The greatpower of the visual artsis their ability to havea varietyof effectson our lives;
but that power can make them manipulative, colonizing, and disenfranchising.The complexity
of this powerneedsto be consideredaspart of educationalexperience.For example,advertising
images are produced by artists and are thought of as good for the companieswhose products
they are intendedto sell, but, they often representstereotypesand cultural biasesthat damage
viewers' self-concepts.Another example is the astronomical amount of money paid to sports
starsandforhistorical fine art, which seemsinconsistentwith the idealsof moral responsibility.
As a resultof suchcomplexities,investigationsof issuesof emporve:-:nent, representation, and
social consciousness are becomingmore importantin art education.
826 FREEDMANAND STUHR

Cultural Productioi; Connects and Empowers People

Visual culture connectsmakersto viewers through communication,identity formation, and

cultural mediation.Addressingaspectsof visual communication,identity formation,and cul-
tural mediationhasbecomea vital issuein art education(e.g.,Ballengee-Morris,& Striedieck,
1997; Freedman,1994;Stuhr, 1995). Studio productioncan aid studentsto understandthat
visual cultureinvolvespersonaland communalcodesof symbols,images,environments,arti-
facts,and so on. Investigatingthe relationshipbetweenmakersand viewers of visual culture
can help them to identify and recognizeethnocentricperspectivesat the national,regional,
state,and local levels.This processis importantbecauseit createspossibilitiesfor the critique
of visual culture at all levels to achievedemocraticeducationalgoals intendedto guide the
preparationof reflectiveandresponsiblecitizens,consequentlyleadingto a more sociallycon-
sciousand equitablesociety.From a visual culture perspective,productionempowersmakers
and viewersby promoting critique throughthe processof making, encouraginganalysisdur-
ing viewing, and enablingmakers and viewers to claim ownershipof images and designed
objects.

CONCLUSION

Art educationbasedon teachingvisual culturerequiresnew curriculumand instructionalroles,

content, and strategiesto shift the focus of the field fiom nanow, conventional approachesto
openprocessesofcreative and critical inquiry. A new languageis necessaryfor art education
that doesnot solelydependon fine artsdiscourse.Ideally,it shouldinvolve discourseson all the
visual arts,suchasmediastudies,designeducation,cultural critique,and visual anthropology.
Art teachersshould be educatedto becomeinvolved citizens in the various communitiesin
which they live and work. They should strive to enrich the communities to create pride in
cultural heritage and addresscontemporaryproblems through artistic solutions. Art should be
approachedas an equallylegitimateschoolsubjectand conceptuallyintegratedwith the restof
the schoolcurriculum.All educatorsshouldteachthe conceptsand skills necessaryto function
effectivelyin a democraticsocietynow and in the future.
New instructionalstrategiesinclude teachersbecomingrole models of leadershipin their
professionalcommunity.To conceptualizeart educationasdifferentfrom otherschoolsubjects
inadvertentlydisengagesit from the legitimate school curriculum. In the larger sense,art
teachersfocus on what other teachersconsiderimportant: the conceptsand skills necessary
to function effectively in a democratic society now and in the future. But, art teachersdo this
throughvisual culture,which is as profoundin its effect as written texts.
Teachereducationprogramsneedto prepareteachersto act asfacilitatorsof studentcreative
and critical inquiry. As part of teachingvisual culture,we must shifi from a focus on didactic
instructionto an educaiionthat promotesstudentresponsibility.When studentsare allowed
to investigatethe range of visual culture with the guidanceof a teacher,they can acdvely
and
discovercomplex meanings,multiple connections,and enrichedpossibilitiesfor creation
be conceptualized as multitasking arenaswhere images and
critique. Art classroomsshould
produced and discussed to lead studentsand teachersthrough the
objectscrossover and are
investigationof ideas,issues,opinions, and conflicts.
Throughtechnologicaladvancements. visualcultureis becomingincreasinglypervasiveand
affecting the lives of studentsand teachers worldwide. The professionalfield must respond
to the challengeof this significant social change by educatingnew art teachersand retrarntng
current art teachersto use technology to create students who are aware ofthe world they live
in and to take an activeresponsiblerole in improving life for all.
 36, CURRICULUMCHANGEFORTHE2ISTCENTURY827

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

The authorswish to thank Ron Neperudfor his careful readingand thoughtful commentson
this chaoter.

REFERENCES

Aronorvitz.S. (199;l).Tcchnolog,v- and the luture of rvork. In G. Bender & T. Druckley (Eds.).Crllure on tlrc brink:
Ideaologiesof tethnologt (pp. l 5-301. Seattle:Bay Press.
B a l l e n g c e - M i t r r iC s .. B . , & S t r i e d i e c kL. M . ( 1 9 9 7 ) A
. postrnodem f e m i n i s tp e r s p e c t i voen v i s u a la r t a n dv i s u a lc u i t u r e
in elementaryteachereducation.In D. R. Walling {Ed.). Llnder C(tnslruL:irtn;Th? n,le L'f'theurt antl visuttlt ulture
( p p . 1 9 3 - 2 1 5 . )I n d i a n a p o l i sP: h i D e l t a K a p p a .
t t n d h u n r t t t r i t i ei ns p o s t n n d e ms t - h o o l i n g
B a l l e n g c e - M o r i sC l r t a n d v i s u a lc u l t u r a le d u c a t i o ni n a c h a t r s i n sw o r l d .A r r
. . . & S t u h r .P L . ( 2 0 0 1 ) .M u l t i c u l t u r a a
Educatiot. 54(,+).6 13.
, . M . ( 1 9 9 1 ) .A r t e d u c a t i o na n d e n v i r o n m e n Jt .o u n t a lo f M u l t i c u l t u r u lu n d C r o s sC u l l u r a lR e s e u r t l ltn A r t
B a r b o s aA
EdLtcatirut.9(I ). 59-6,1.
Baronc, T.. & Eisner,E. (1991). Another exampleof arts-bascdresearch.Contplententan'Methtils.fbr lleseartlt in
Edw utiut. Washington,DCI:Antcrican EducatitlnalRcscarchAssociation.
Blandy. D. (199.1).Assuming responsibility:Disability rights and thc pfeparatiotrol art educators.Struliesin Art
E d u t ' u t i o r t-.t . 5 ()3 I 7 9 1 8 7 .
B g u g h t o nD , . ( 1 9 9 4 ) .E v u l u a t i o rrtu t t l a s s e s s r n ein tt ' i s u u ld r t s ( d u L u t i u l . G e e l o n g V
, I C : D c a k i nU n i v e r s i t y .
I l o u g l r t o n l,) . ( 1 9 9 7 ) .R e c o n s i d e r i nigs s u e so f a s s c s s m e natn t l a c h i e v e t n e nstt a n d a r disn a r l s d u c a t i o l lS. t u d i c si n A r t
) .9 9 2 l - 1 .
E d u c a t i o n-. 1 6 ( . 1 1
Chalmers.F. G. ( l gUl ). Art educationas cthnology.Studiesin Art Educatiort.22(3). 6 l 4
Clilf ord, J. ( lgull). Thepredicarnentt,f culture: Ttt'entieth-t'enturt ellmogrupht,lileralurc, nnrl arl. Carnbridgc.MA:
FlarvardUnivcrsity Prcss.
Collins. J. (1989). IJnconntuttrtultures: Ptryulortullure urul posl nuxlentisnt.New York: Routlcdge.
C o n g d o n .K . G . ( 1 9 9 1 ) .A f b l k a r t i b c u s .J o u r n a lo . l ' M u l t i u t l t u r aal n L lC r c s s ' t u l t u r u R
l esean-h
in Art Educutittt,9.
65 72.
I)uncurn. P ( 1990). Clcaring thc dccks f'or dorninantculturc: Some lirst principleslbr a contcmporaryart cducatlon.
Studiesiil Art Educatitnt:A Jttunrul tt.fIssuesand Resean'h'-l/('1). 207-215
E l l a n d .A . ( 1 9 7 6 ) . ' f h cs c h o o la r t s t y l e :A l u n c t i o n a a l n a l v s i sS. t u t l i e .i sr t A r t E d r c t t l i r t r t1, 7 . 3 7 ! 4 .
E f l a n d .A . ( 1 9 8 . 1 )S. c h o o la r t a n d i t s s o c i a lo r i g i n s S t u d i e :i n A r t l : d u t t t t i o t , 2 1 . 1 9 5 7
: h e y t l i t i c s o f s ^ l e i n t o t i l e n r y x t r a nt u l t L t r eN
E w e n .S . ( l 9 U t t ) .A / 1 r ' t n s w n i n gi n n . q e s T . e w Y o r k : B a s i cB o o k s .
F r e e d r n a n . K . ( 1 9 9 4I n) .t e r p r e t i n g g e n d e r a n d v i scuual tl u r e i n a r t c l a s s r o o t n s . S t u d i e s i n A r t E d u c o l i r n , . li - 5 7 (3).
17 0 .
. d u c a t i o n acl h a n g cw i t h i n s t r u c t u r eosl h i s t o r y c. u l t u r e .a n dd i s c o u r s eI.n R . W . N e p e r u d( E d . ) .
F r e e d n i a nK. . ( 1 9 9 5 ) E
Conte.ril. ((nleill, and tomntrutilt in art educalion.Ncw York: TeachcrsColiege Prcss.
F r c c d m a nK . ( 2 ( n 0 ) .S o c i a lp c r s p c c t i v eosn a n c d u c a t i o ni n t h c U . S . :T e a c h i n gv i s u a lc u l t u r ci n a d c m o c r a c yS. t a d i e s
i n A r t E d u c a t i o n . 1 1 ( 1 ) . 3 1317 9 .
Freedman.K. (2003). Tenchingvisttttltulture. New York: TeachcrsCollege Prcss.
F r e c d m a nK . . . & W o o d .J . ( 1 9 9 9 ) .S t u d e n kt n o w l e d g eo l ' v i s u a lc u l t u r e :I m a g e si n s i d ea n do u t s i d eo l s c h o o l .S t u d i e s
in Art Edttcation,2(10). 128-112.
G a r b e rE . . ( 1 9 9 5 ) .T c a c h i n ga r 1i n r h c c o n t e x to f c u l t u r e :A s t u d vi n t h e b o r d e r l a n d sS. l r r d i e isn A r t E d u c a t i o n , 3 6 ( 4 | , .
2 18 - 2 3 2 .
Gardner.H. (1912). The developmentof sensitivit),to ligurai and stylistic aspectsof paintings. British Journal of
Pstclutlogt,6J. 605-6 I 5.
. 9 9 9 ) . C o l l e c t i t t g v i s i b l e e t , i d eMnitnen. e a p o l i s . M NU: n i v e r s i t y o M
G a i n e s . J . M . . & R e n o w . M . ( E d s . () 1 f intiesota
Press.
G a r o i a n . C . ( 1 9 9 9 )P. e r f i t r n i n g p e d a g t t g t : T t * + a r d a n a r t op; fo l i t i c s .A l b a n y :S U N Y P r c s s ,
G i r o u x . H . ( 1 9 9 2 ) . B o r d e r c r o s . s i n gCsu: l t u r a l w o r k e r s a n d t h e p o l i t i c s r t J ' e d u c a t l o r t . N e w Y o r k . L o n d o n : R o u t l e d g e .
Grigsby,J. (1917). Art & ethnics.Dubuque.Iowa: Wm C Brown
Hemandez,F. (2000).Educati1n t culnrra yisrai. Barcelona:Octacdro.
Hicks. L. (1990).A f'eministanalysrsof empowermentand community in arts education.Sadies in Art Edtrctttiot,
-12(r).36-46.
Jagodzinski.I (1997).The nostalgiaof art education:Reinscribingthe master'snarrative,Studiesin Art Education.
3B(2).80-95.
828 FREEDMANANDSTUHR

Lanier,V ( 1969).The teachin-e oi art as social revolution.Phi Delra Kappan, 50(6). 314-3 19.
Lanicr. V (1.974).A plagueon all your houses.NAEA Joumal,27(3), 12-15.
McFee, J. K.. & Degge,R. (1971).Art, utlture, and environment;A catalystfor teacfting.Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Mirzoefi, N. (Ed.). (1998). Vsual culture reader.New York: Routledge.
Morley, D. (1992).Television,audiences,and cultural studles.London: Routledge.
Neperud,R. (1973).Art education:Towardsan environmentalaesthetic.Arl Education,26(.3).
Nepenrd,R. (Ed.). (1995). Conren, (ontent, and commwtity in art education.New York: TeacherCollegePress.
Parsons,M. (1998).Integratedcurriculum and our paradigmofcognition in the arts.Studiesin Art Education,39(2),
1 0 3 - 116 .
Pinar,W F. (Ed.). (1988). Contemporamcurriculum discourses.Scottsdale,AZ: GorsuchScarisbrick.
Pinar,W. F., Reynolds,W. M., Slattery,P, & Taubman,P M. (1996). Understandingcurriculum. New York: Peter
Lang.
Prosser.J. (Ed.). (1998).Inruge-basedresearcl't:
A sourcebookforrlualitativeresearchers. Bristol: Falmer.
Rose,G. (2001). Visualmethodologies.London: Sage.
Rushkol1,D. ( 1994).Media virus: Hidden agendasin popular culture.Sydney:RandomHouse.
Scollon,R., & Scollon,S. W (1995).Interculturalcomnunication.Cambridge,MA: Blackwell.
Shusterman,R. (1989).Pragnntist aesthetics:Living beauty,rethinkingat't. Oxfbrd: Blackwell.
Slattery,P ( 1995). Postmodernismas a challengeto dominantrepresentations of cuniculum. In J. Glanz & L. Behar-
Horenstein(Eds.).Paradign debtttesin curriculum and supervision.New York: Greenwood.
Smith-Shank.D. (1996). Microethnographyof a Grateful Dead event:American subcultureaesthelics.Joumal of
Multicultural ond Cross-culturalResearchin Art Education,14,80-91.
Solso,R, (1997).Mind antl brain sciencesin tlrc 2lst century Cambridge,MA: MIT Press.
Stuhr P L. (1995).A socialreconstluctionistmulticulturalart curiculum design:Using the powwow as an example.
In R. W. Neperud (Ed). Context, content, and cotnmunity in art education: Bel,eni p)t\^odernisnr New York:
TeachersCollegePress.
Stuhr,P L. ( 1999). Responseto Brian Allison's article,"Colour. culture,language,and education." Jountal of Multi-
cultural and Cross-culturalResearchin Art Education./8(1). 1'1-15.
Sturken,M.. & Cartwright,L. (2001).Practicesof looking:An introductionto visualculture.Oxfbrd, England:Oxford
U n i v e r s i t yP r e s s .
Tavin. K. (2000). Just doing it: Towards a critical thinking of visual culture. In D. Wiel & H. K. Anderson
(Eds.). Perspectivesin critical tlrcory,: Essal'sby teachersin theon' and practice (pp. 187-210). New York:
PeterLang.
T a v i n . K . ( 2 0 0 1 ) . T e a c h i n g i n a n d t h r o u g h v i s u a l c u l t u r eJ .o u r n a l t l ' M u l t i c u l t u r a l a n d C r o s s - C u l t u r a l R e s e a r c h i r t
Art Education.18(l ), 37-40.
Wilson, B., & Wilson, M. (1977).An iconoclasticvrew of the imagery sourcesof the drawing of young people.Art
Education,J0( I ), 5-1 1.
Wilson, B.. Hurwitz. A.. & Wilson. M. (1987). Teachingdrav,ing.frontdrt. Worchester,MA: Davis.