THE CLEARING HOUSE

, VOL. , NOS. –, –

http://dx.doi.org/./..

Art Integration Fosters Empathy in the Middle School Classroom

R. Darden Bradshaw
Department of Art & Design, University of Dayton, Dayton, Ohio, USA

ABSTRACT KEYWORDS
In this article, I highlight findings from a nine-day unit embedded within a larger, four-month long Art integration; empathy;
qualitative action research study set in a public middle school. My goal in conducting this research visual culture
was examination of relationships between visual culture and art integration as a method of fostering
students to find voice while taking risks. A collaborative process was central to the unit in which the
non-art educator and I developed and taught persuasion using art and art history. Students engaged
in creating collaborative ecological installations, the integration of visual culture bridged art and
other curricular areas while creating spaces for authentic learning. Through making art, students built
shared knowledge, engaged in safe discourse, and expressed empathy.

Introduction and Milbrandt 2005). While visual culture includes

all aspects of culture expressed visually, visual cul-
If education is the petri dish in which we are actively
ture art education invites learners to examine, decon-
“becoming” (Eisner 2002), then certainly art educa-
struct, and reconstruct images as both text and context
tion must strive to help students become more empa-
(Duncum 2006). Centering learning around real-world
thetic and caring. From 2006 to 2012, during my
issues meaningful to students creates a space for youth
tenure as a middle school Arts Integration Specialist, I
to safely illuminate and challenge power relationships
noticed an increase in students’ lack of empathy toward
through art making.
one another. Lack of empathy in schools can manifest
In this vein, I undertook a four-month qualitative
in bullying (Marr and Field 2011; Orpinas and Horne
action research study in a Southwestern US public mid-
2006; Rodkin 2011; Unnever and Cornell 2003), peer
dle school from August to December 2012. I collabo-
victimization, (Morgan 2012) and increases in school
rated with three non-art educators to create and teach
shootings (Pieotrowski and Hoot 2008). While many
a series of units integrating visual culture art education
art educators are working toward solutions, integrating
with their specific content area. This article focuses on
the arts into the non-art classroom is one place to sup-
the second curriculum unit in which I integrated per-
port empathy development.
suasive writing and ecological art into a collaborative
Art educator Carol Jeffers (2009) argues for an
art making experience in the English Language Arts
art education of empathy that combines caring, rela-
(ELA). Ecological art is generally defined as artwork
tional pedagogy with cognitive growth and sociocul-
that educates and promotes action directly addressing
tural awareness. In our complex pluralistic society, art
environmental issues. That particular unit took place
educators must not only adapt to the needs of our learn-
over six days during which time I taught each lesson
ers; we must celebrate the value of art as a means of fos-
three times during 80-min class sessions to 82 students
tering empathy, developing creative and critical think-
within the 6th grade GATE (gifted and talented educa-
ing skills, and finding solutions to the problems we
tion) cohort. Their English teacher was a valuable col-
face. There is tremendous value in integrating visual
laborator, providing insight to curricular objectives for
culture art education into a comprehensive art cur-
the unit on persuasive writing.
riculum grounded in authentic instruction (Anderson

CONTACT R. Darden Bradshaw dbradshaw@udayton.edu Department of Art & Design, University of Dayton, Dayton, OH , USA.
Color versions of one or more of the figures in the article can be found online at www.tandfonline.com/vtch.
©  Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
110 R. D. BRADSHAW
Having just concluded a nine-day unit in which
we examined the way gender roles are communicated
through visual culture, the students and I were already
comfortable working together. We jumped right into
this unit. I had three goals: First, I anticipated stu-
dents would enlarge their knowledge of persuasive
texts while experiencing a well-known contemporary
artist’s ability to persuade through the visual; I hoped
to demonstrate that persuasive writing may be easier
(and more enjoyable for some) when following analysis
of visual art. Second, I hoped students would develop
skill in deciphering persuasive messages embedded in
visual contexts. Third, I wanted students to collabora-
tively create art.
Introducing art as text: Andy Goldsworthy
Utilizing an action research methodology (Somekh
2008), I planned the first day of the unit with the ELA
teacher and allowed each day’s events and reflections
to inform the subsequent sessions. Throughout the
unit, I continually reflected on the process and assessed
the learners, their interests, prior knowledge and
engagement with the work. Many of those reflections,
documented in my reflective journal, informed my
decision-making; central to every decision was my goal
of fostering empathy within the community of learn-
ers. The resulting unit became a fluid, organic inquiry
experience built on respect and care (Noddings 1984)
for my learners.
The first day of the unit students worked in pairs dis-
cussing what “art in or about the environment might
look like.” Students indicated it was “art in nature,”
“art from our environment like twigs and leaves,” and
“beauty in nature” (PI reflective journal, November
27, 2012; Bradshaw 2013). I was surprised at how
perfunctory their responses were in light of the rich
descriptions they had communicated in our prior unit.
To counteract the lack of description, I incorporated
a writing method their language Arts teacher had
recently introduced called Image Grammar (Noden
2011), a method to build students’ acumen in using
descriptive words that paint a mental picture for their
reader. The ELA teacher anticipated that the Image
Grammar program would provide practice in creat-
ing rich written description. Taking persuasion beyond
the written word, I introduced world-renowned artist
Andy Goldsworthy. Goldsworthy is a British sculp-
tor and environmental artist known for his ephemeral
site-specific installations. After completing the work in
situ, Goldsworthy photographs it and then abandons
it, allowing nature to take its course, interacting with
and changing the work. His work became the juncture
through which students could investigate persuasion in
visual text.
Using a text-evidence strategy we had practiced in
the previous unit, I gave each table of four students an
8½” × 11” enlargement of a photograph document-
ing one of eight different Goldsworthy works and asked
them to (a) note what they inferred from the image
with links to evidence in the image that supported their
inference and (b) to describe how they believed the
artist created the artwork. After giving students time to
dialogue, I projected the eight images for everyone in
the class to see; each group that analyzed that particular
work of art then presented their findings to the entire
class. Now, as opposed to their lack of response at the
beginning of class, there ensued lively and vigorous dis-
cussion in which students questioned the construction
process and surmised the meaning of an image while
connecting it to their visual culture.
Students focused on the construction of the art-
works within the photographic image. For example,
they questioned the proper orientation of the The Big
Freeze (Icicle 4), Dumfries, 2003 and wondered which
was top or bottom. Prompting their metacognition, I
asked them to determine if their question needed to
be answered in order to support their inferences. They
believed it did need to be answered. Inviting them to
become aware of their thinking made them more dis-
cerning of the kinds of peer-generated questions that
leveraged critical thinking (Weil 2004).
To deconstruct the meaning embedded within the
images, students used multiple strategies for interpret-
ing Goldsworthy’s work. Critical reflection invites us
to gauge and contrast our values and beliefs with what
we see, who we believe we are, and that which we are
not (Horn 2004). One group articulated hidden mes-
sages they believed the artist intended to communicate.
Referring to Goldsworthy’s work Feathers Plucked from
Dead Heron, 1982, where he has used feathers to create
a diagonal, linear composition they said, “We see these
feathers symbolize [sic] a path to achieve a solution
to a problem.” As this group investigated the potential
of metaphor conveyed in a work of art, another group
of students used visual culture to frame their under-
standing of the new artwork. In referring to Goldswor-
thy’s Yellow and Dark, 1986, where leaves of differing

value intersect, students commented, “this looks like
the lines on the side of the MonsterTM drink can or
claw marks” (PI reflective journal, November 27, 2012).
Providing students the opportunity to look carefully, to
think and talk about the ways in which the images were
constructed and through that process make interpreta-
tions of the work informed by their lived experiences
was valuable. The process affirmed their skills as criti-
cal art interpreters and motivated them to listen, speak,
and critically reflect. In doing so, students argued their
perspective and justified it using their lived experience
and direct links to the artwork to form their own inter-
pretation, rather than rely on those of the instructor.
A cognitive challenge that occurs when looking at
art can be that despite deep, careful analysis, we can-
not fully determine a work of art’s method of con-
struction. Aware of this uncertainty, I wanted to open
up a space for students to think about the making of
art. On the second day of the unit, I showed students
an excerpt from the film Rivers and tides. The film
followed Goldsworthy as he worked in various set-
tings on numerous artworks, while discussing his tech-
nical, artistic and cognitive processes. None of these
works had been a part of the previous day’s lesson.
The typically boisterous middle schoolers were quiet
and focused. They watched Goldsworthy attach icicles
to a rock through which shone the rising sun. They
saw him create an oculus form out of driftwood held
inside a tide-pool and watched it float away as the
tide rose. In another segment of the film, they saw
Goldsworthy spend an entire day stacking and restack-
ing slate and rock to create a “cairn.” After watching
the film segments, students were given an opportu-
nity to reflect in their journals. Students interpreted the
content embedded in the work, while others addressed
the temporary quality of the art and assigned mean-
ing to that temporality. Learners compared the way
Goldsworthy worked to that of a set designer creat-
ing a scene within a movie, while others highlighted
Goldsworthy’s relationship with the environment both
as inspiration and actor within the process of the art-
work’s life. Students brought their experience in decon-
structing visual culture to bear on their interpretations
while constructing deeper relevance as their knowledge
grew. Their comments were not only indicative of the
developing critical literacy in which they were engaged,
but highlighted the interdependent interpretive pro-
cess (Barrett 2003). Within the world of art education
we take for granted that, “artworks are always about
THE CLEARING HOUSE 111
something” (Barrett 2003, 198) yet the process of
describing, analyzing and interpreting the Goldswor-
thy artworks internalized this knowledge for students.
Capitalizing on their interest in Goldsworthy’s work,
I concluded our day by asking students to practice their
persuasive writing. They wrote a letter to the curator
of the local university museum persuading her to bring
Goldsworthy and his work to town. They needed to use
specific evidence and as much descriptive language as
possible to support their argument. The resulting brief,
but highly descriptive and persuasive letters offered
another space for students to articulate their voice and
build meaning. The museum curator graciously replied
and expressed her sincere appreciation for the students’
interest in Goldsworthy.
Investigating contemporary ecological artists
I felt energized by the students’ enthusiasm and willing-
ness to work, yet daunted by the task ahead. How could
I bridge their budding knowledge of art with the man-
date to teach persuasion and foster a space for social
empathy awareness to develop? I recalled the work
of Chris Jordan. Jordan uses photography and digital
manipulation to comment intelligently on the ecolog-
ical impact of extreme consumerism within western
culture. Relating to non-human creatures has proven
to be a space in which we gain knowledge of what it
is to be human, (Myers 2007) so I determined a non-
threatening starting point to nurturing empathy might
be ecological literacy.
Therefore, our third day together began with two
projected images of Agnes Denes’ Wheatfield, 1982. I
asked the students to silently look at the image. Then I
invited students to describe what they saw. They noted
the photographs were of New York City. I asked them
to step back and describe what made up the image lead-
ing to their inference that it was New York City. They
noted a golden yellow substance in the foreground
of the image and the Statue of Liberty in one photo-
graph. The other image, taken from the opposite direc-
tion showed a field of wheat with the World Trade
Towers in the background. In this descriptive process
a valuable connection was made: a student noted the
photograph must have been taken before September 11,
2001. I encouraged them to continue using their deduc-
tive skills linking inferences to the image resulting in
a loud and effusive whole group discussion about why
a field of wheat would be grown in the midst of the
112 R. D. BRADSHAW
bustling metropolis, the intention of the artist who
cleared the lot, planted, tended, and ultimately, har-
vested the wheat to disperse it across the world. The
visual analysis and discussion about art as social com-
mentary supported students’ in finding evidence in
images.
Moving to small group discussions, each table was
given a handout with one or two representative images
of a different artist’s work. I selected images from seven
artists and one organization working with environ-
mental or ecological content, spanning a period of
30 years: Agnes Denes, Nele Azevedo, Chris Jordan,
Fritz Haeg, Ruth Wallen, Sam Easterson, Grant Manier,
and the Institute for Figuring. Students were asked to
read accompanying background information, look at
the artwork and then discuss using guiding questions.
After time to engage in that task, the artists’ works were
projected for everyone to see; each table group pre-
sented the artist and their work to the entire class.
As Arthur Efland (2002) noted, a social justice
art education framework provides a juncture through
which investigative paths can meet. This was true for
me, as well as the students. In this lesson, two major
pedagogical insights occurred. First, students’ lack of
shared knowledge became apparent as they taught
each other. Second, students furthered their individual
voices. The neutral ground of art became a safe space
for them to give voice to somewhat controversial sub-
jects. In both cases, the more questions students asked
of themselves and each other, the deeper they moved to
the core content communicated in the artwork.
Building shared knowledge
The lack of shared knowledge was most evident when
students discussed Melting Men, 2009, an ice sculpture
created by Brazilian artist Nele Azevedo on the release
of the Impact of Global Climate Change Report. Students
analyzed a photograph of the installation consisting
of 1000 small frozen ice sculptures of human figures,
placed along the steps of the Berlin concert hall and
allowed to melt. When the words “climate change” were
spoken by one student, a number of others asked, “what
is climate change?” As students shared their knowl-
edge of climate change to create a more holistic defini-
tion of the concept, I realized that not everyone knew
or understood the vocabulary I used. Beyond clari-
fying vocabulary, students brought their prior knowl-
edge to the collective discussion. When discussing the
work of sisters Christine and Margaret Wertheim from
the Institute for Figuring who use hyperbolic geom-
etry to create complex collaborative crocheted forms
that reference coral reefs in need of protection, a stu-
dent suggested the work should be made of steel, rather
than yarn so it would not deteriorate. This comment
prompted another student to share her background
knowledge of coral reef production. She noted, “the
crocheted coral reef took a long time to make and lots
of people worked together, just like a real coral reef
takes a long time to make and lots of organisms die in
the process.” She continued by suggesting that yes, steel
would be harder to destroy but that was the problem
the artists were highlighting in their material choice,
since coral reefs are easily destroyed. (PI reflective jour-
nal, November 29, 2012). Her background knowledge
offered her peers a more informed interpretation of the
work and the artists’ intentions.
Safe discourse
Investigating each artist, their work and the content
behind their work allowed students to listen deeply
to each other, map their knowledge, and build con-
sciousness. As focus moved from students’ opinions
to specific links and evidence in the images, learn-
ers were open and receptive. This safe space to talk
about difficult issues was most notable in the discus-
sion of the work of Sam Easterson and Chris Jordan.
Easterson highlights public lack of awareness of ani-
mals and plants in their natural surroundings by
strapping tiny helmet-mounted video cameras onto
ducks, wolves, and other animals. The images captured
through these cameras document and record the ani-
mals’ lived perspective. Viewers are allowed unique
access to the private life of an animal. During the heated
discussion of Easterson’s work, there was a noticeable
shift from discourse polarizing hunter against non-
hunter to students commenting on the nuanced com-
plexity that they themselves are actors in the food
chain. I encouraged students by noting they were doing
exactly what I believed Easterson wanted them to do –
voice issues that impact the voiceless.
Jordan has an extensive body of work but the stu-
dents were only shown photographs from the Midway:
Message from the Gyre (2009-current) series. A collec-
tive gasp was heard when I projected the works depict-
ing the carcasses of baby albatrosses that died from con-
sumption of brightly colored plastic found in the ocean.

Jordan notes, “on Midway Atoll, a remote cluster of
islands more than 2000 miles from the nearest conti-
nent, the detritus of our mass consumption surfaces in
an astonishing place: inside the stomachs of thousands
of dead baby albatrosses” (Jordan 2011, n.p.). Students,
without prompting, noted the persuasive power of the
work. They commented that it made them sad, that
Jordan uses “photography to persuade us to recycle
more and think about where our waste goes” and that
“when we see trash in the baby bird’s [sic] body it
convinces people that we need to keep trash out of
the water.” One student exclaimed that Jordan was
“acknowledging and disputing” to which the entire
class erupted in affirmation. Disoriented, the ELA
teacher came to my rescue. She informed me that this
was the language she taught students in their persuasive
writing lessons. The students noted “Jordan is acknowl-
edging the other [consumers who discard waste] and
disputing it by showing the perspective or side of the
birds.” “The emotion is powerful. We feel guilty and
will stop throwing out our trash,” concluded another
student (PI reflective journal, November 29, 2012). As
these comments indicate, the act of looking at and
interpreting art serves as an important bridge to cre-
ating and making. Creating a space for discourse, stu-
dents had connected to each other and begun question-
ing their world.
Persuasion and activism
On our fourth and fifth days together, students gath-
ered into small self-selected groups. Their assignment
invited them to collaboratively brainstorm an issue
or message of social and ecological importance they
hoped to convey. They then sketched ideas for creat-
ing an installation artwork, determined the materials
needed and selected potential sites on campus for their
installations. Students rose to the challenge of using
our sixth and final 80-min class period to install, docu-
ment and de-install their artwork. The collaborative art
making process that ensued fostered space for students
to bridge their visual culture awareness from the ear-
lier unit with their activist artist selves, to hold fast to
their voices, to have fun making art and support each
other in empathetic ways. Now, in keeping with the
true goal of a social justice art education, students were
developing dispositions of activist artists (Dewhurst
2010) – to persuade their viewers about an issue of con-
cern by creating collaborative, site-specific ecological
THE CLEARING HOUSE 113
installations on campus. Their excitement affirmed the
power of visual culture art integration.
Visual culture leads to common ground
Drawing from their collective visual culture allowed
students to find common ground with their peers and
accept each other’s ideas with ease, while incorporat-
ing persuasive ecological themes into their installa-
tions. These visual culture references included creating
a gigantic water bottle out of smaller bottles, creating a
public service announcement that parodied the lyrics
to a contemporary song by LMFAO titled “Everyday
I’m Shuffling,” and having a Polly Pocket doll reside in
a bird house, thus reversing the typical size difference
between humans and birds. One group’s very detailed
sketch required them to cut away the grass from the
sports field to reflect a large triangular recycling logo.
They planned to then fill in the area from which the
grass had been removed with trash collected from
school. However, on the installation day they deter-
mined the most ecologically friendly plan was to create
a depression of the logo in the grass; it would be tempo-
rary and still visually persuasive (Figures 1a and 1b).
Empathy develops as a result of collaboration
Further, students began to be aware of the way their
process might affect one another. Lantana, a flowery
shrub growing abundantly in the Sonoran desert area
is a common butterfly attractor. The lantana plants on
campus, often trampled by careless middle school stu-
dents or picked to serve as hair accessories, became
the site of an ecological intervention by a group of
three young women. Drawing attention to the impact
of these careless actions on the flowers’ necessary
pollinators was the goal of these activist artists. The
installation process began with Julissa and Cynthia
immediately trying to find a pleasing composition. As
they moved their paper butterflies from one bush to
another, they were very vocal noting, “put that there,”
“move this over there,” and “clean up that trash there.”
Finally finding a pleasing composition, they took pho-
tographs (Figure 2a) and repeated the process to cre-
ate five or six new compositions. Their third group
member, Charissa was a very shy young lady with a
speech impediment who stood quietly off to the side
watching them during this process. Suddenly, Cynthia
recognized that Charissa was not joining in. She
114 R. D. BRADSHAW

Figure a. Installation plan and sketch.

 THE CLEARING HOUSE 115

Figure b. Completed installation of recycling logo made from trash.

approached, inquiring if everything was OK. Charissa Making art is enjoyable and challenging
nodded and said, “I am just waiting until you two are
Self-selecting groups and topics for the ecological
done.” Neither Cynthia nor Julissa realized that their
project fostered student voices and contributed to
quick verbal processing, where they often spoke over
their engagement. Discussion was lively and their
one another, had been one that excluded Charissa from
ideas found fertile ground. They worked diligently. At
the process. At this point, both turned to Charissa and
times they argued and voices were raised. In some
said, “You tell us where you want things” creating a
groups, the collaborative process was a struggle. Stu-
space for Charissa to voice her vision (Figure 2b). Giv-
dents struggled to communicate with their group. Oth-
ing students freedom to engage and converse with each
ers were challenged in listening to another’s ideas. Yet
other without adult intervention can lead to an increase
despite hurt feelings and opinions not always being
in sensitivity to others’ needs. Curriculum should foster
readily accepted, the students persevered to find work-
a space in which student voice is valued; it is through
able solutions that validated everyone’s ideas. The ELA
being heard that students become open to hearing each
teacher and I watched from a supportive distance,
other.

Figure a. Julissa and Cynthia’s installation photograph. Signage reads: “To pick a flower is to take a butterfly’s food.”
116 R. D. BRADSHAW
Figure b. Charissa’s alteration of the installation and her photograph.
consciously not stepping in, as students learned to com-
municate with one another without stepping on each
other’s ideas, persisted in the face of discord, asked
for help when they came to an impasse, and came
to friendly consensus. The interpersonal challenge of
this task was not lost on them. Students noted, “it
is not easy to disagree with people you are working
with.” They discovered the benefits as they noted, “com-
ing up with ideas for our sculpture and collecting our
items and putting it together [was valuable] because we
got to share these great ideas.” (PI, reflective journal
November 29, 2012).
As student groups traipsed around campus, found
their installation site, set up the artwork, documented
and then de-installed the work, the adult volunteers
working with them all commented on what a great
time the students had, evidenced by their smiles and
laughter. Student comments supported these observa-
tions. “It was fun because we got dirty,” “I was with my
friends and making art in the environment,” “it was fun
working in a group,” “being outside in the warm sun,”
and “ …we didn’t have to stress and could be happy and
silly while doing our work.” Beyond having fun, stu-
dents developed greater awareness of the artistic pro-
cess and the complexity of art making. They noted
that “environmental artists are hard workers and have
lots of fun,” but it is “tricky to tell your message,” and
challenging to “think outside the box.” For many stu-
dents, the challenge of persuading their viewers was
made less difficult because they had peer support and
feedback loops in the creative process.
Becoming advocates
Visual culture art integration empowered the stu-
dents to critically question the visual culture messages
that have been accepted/internalized by society, and
through art making created a space where beliefs and
values could be translated to action (Dewhurst 2010).
Authentic integrated curriculum allows space to recon-
struct and challenge those messages. Students became
advocates as they explored global issues of water con-
servation, animal rights, and oil pollution. The group of
students examining water conservation decided, after
much discussion, to collect used water bottles from
campus rather than “drink lots of water this week.” The
unit was a catalyst in which students saw themselves as
individuals with agency and voice in empathizing with
peers and within the school community. It was in the
process of creating their artworks that students real-
ized the volume of recycling and trash their school of
800 students produced. They chose, without any
teacher input, to attend the Parent Teacher Student
Association meeting the following week and success-
fully argued that the custodial staff could not be
expected to keep up with the volume of trash. They
suggested and received parental support to implement
a twice a month student led grounds clean-up. These

same students spearheaded the cleanup for the remain-
der of that school year, a persuasive action holding
far greater implications than a more traditional assign-
ment may have.
Conclusion
My experience working with middle school students
indicates that creating art is a system through which
young people can map and question their knowledge
while developing empathy – individually, interrelation-
ally, or within a community (Wagaman 2011). As stu-
dents became researchers inquiring into art theories,
practices and contexts used by artists, (Sullivan 2005)
their construction of personal, sensory, and artistic
knowing is supported (Eisner 2002); the lines divid-
ing art class from instruction in other content areas are
blurred; and school activities reflect the complexity of
the visual world in which we live while offering authen-
tic, meaningful responses to it.
References
Anderson, T., and M. Milbrandt. 2005. Art for life: Authentic
instruction in art. New York, NY; McGraw Hill.
Barrett, T. 2003. Interpreting art: Reflecting, wondering and
responding. New York, NY: McGraw Hill.
Bradshaw, R. D. 2013. Visual Culture Art Integration: Fostering
Student Voice. Dissertation: University of Arizona.
Dewhurst, M. 2010. An inevitable question: Exploring the defin-
ing features of social justice art education. Art Education 63
(5): 6–13.
Duncum, P. 2006. Visual culture in the art class: Case studies.
Reston, VA: National Art Education Association.
Efland, A. D. 2002. Art and cognition: Integrating the visual arts
in the curriculum. New York, NY: Teachers College.
Eisner, E. 2002. The arts and the creation of mind. New Haven,
CT: Yale.
Horn, R. A., Jr. 2004. Empowerment of teachers and students.
In Critical thinking and learning: An encyclopedia for par-
ents and teachers, eds J. L. Kincheloe, and D. Weil, 211–216.
Westport, CT: Greenwood.
THE CLEARING HOUSE 117
Jeffers, C. S. 2009. On empathy: The mirror neuron system and
art education. International Journal of Education & the Arts
10 (15). http://www.ijea.org/v10n15/
Jordan, C. 2011. http://www.chrisjordan.com/gallery/midway/
#CF00313%2018x24
Marr, N., and T. Field. 2011. Bullycide: Death at playtime.
Oxfordshire, UK: Success Unlimited.
Morgan, H. 2012. What teachers and schools can do to control
the growing problem of school bullying? The Clearing House
85 (5): 174–178. doi: 10.1080/00098655.2012.677075
Myers, O. E., Jr. 2007. The significance of children and animals:
Social development and our connections to other species. 2nd
rev. ed. West Lafayette, IN: Purdue.
Noden, H. R. 2011. Image grammar: Teaching grammar as part
of the writing process. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Noddings, N. 1984. Caring. Berkeley, CA: University of
California.
Orpinas, P., and A. M. Horne. 2006. Bullying prevention:
Creating a positive school climate and developing social
competence. Washington, D.C.: American Psychological
Association.
Pieotrowksi, D., and J. Hoot. 2008. Bullying and violence in
schools: What teachers should know and do. Childhood
Education 84 (6): 357–363.
Riedlesheimer, T. (Director) and J. Roth. (Producer). 2000.
Rivers and tides: Andy Goldsworthy working with time.
[Motion picture]. Germany. New Video Group.
Rodkin, P. C. 2011. Bullying – and the power of peers. Educa-
tional Leadership 69 (1): 10–16.
Somekh, B. 2008. Action research. The SAGE encyclope-
dia of qualitative research methods. http://sage-erefernce.
com/exproxy1.library.arizona.edu/view/research/n4.xml
Sullivan, G. 2005. Art practice as research: Inquiry in the visual
arts. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Unnever, J. D., and D. G. Cornell. 2003. The culture of bully-
ing in middle school. Journal of School Violence 2 (2): 5–
27.
Wagaman, M. A. 2011. Social empathy as a framework for ado-
lescent empowerment. Journal of Social Service Research 37
(3): 278–293.
Weil, D. 2004. Metacognition: What is transformative metacog-
nition and why is it important? In Critical thinking and
learning: An encyclopedia for parents and teachers, eds
J. L. Kincheloe, and D. Weil,193–197. Westport, CT:
Greenwood.
Copyright of Clearing House is the property of Taylor & Francis Ltd and its content may not
be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's
express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for
individual use.