Learning in and through the Arts: The Question of Transfer
Learning in and through the Arts: The Question of Transfer
复制标题
在艺术中学习并通过艺术学习：转移问题
DOI：
10.1080/00393541.2000.11651679
复制
发表时间：
2000
影响因子：
0.6
通讯作者：
H. Abeles
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Judith M. Burton;Robert Horowitz;H. Abeles
转学问题 从艺术到其他学科的转学问题几乎已经成为艺术教育的主旋律——不幸的是，它几乎已经定义了我们所做的事情！也许是因为近年来艺术逐渐失势，声称它们在学习阅读、写作和计算或学习其他学科中的重要性几乎已成为不言而喻的事情。倡导者们一直渴望证明艺术经历可以促进 K-12 学生的普通教育，特别是通过发展高阶思维技能。当我们的研究团队通读积累的文献时，我们开始发现，那些充满价值且有些尖锐的主张往往会因为宣传的需要而扭曲研究工作。直接地说，20 世纪 80 年代和 90 年代的大多数迁移研究都是以单向和线性学习模型为框架的，在该模型中，艺术中产生的某些能力被认为可以传播到其他学科，并在支持增强学习方面具有“因果关系”。尽管它很有吸引力，但它作为学习的理论模型存在两个主要问题。首先，与加德纳（Gardner，1983）更情境化的多元智能理论一起，神经科学为我们提供了更广阔的视野，让我们了解人类思维在广泛的刺激或智力之间积极地建立联系和关联。因此，没有理由相信从其他学科中学习不会以某种方式“回溯以增强艺术学习”。其次，通常被认为是“艺术学习中产生”的能力，例如创造力、想象力、批判性思维和发散性思维，也被广泛认为是表征其他学科领域思维特征的维度（Burton，1995；Gardner，1983；Greene，1995；Perkins，1987）。换句话说，对迁移的看法很可能在一定程度上取决于不同学科共享某些认知元素、倾向或思维方式的程度。鉴于此，我们很难说艺术中这种能力的获得是它们在其他学科中的出现或增强的“原因”。效果的分类然而，虽然单向因果关系可能是一个有争议的主张，但这很难排除某种影响的存在，暗示艺术学习在其他学科领域的学习中！因此，转移，如果存在的话，可能是艺术学习对其他学科的更大影响的一部分。事实上，虽然在寻找迁移的定义方面存在一些戏剧性的失败，但也取得了一些戏剧性的成功（Catterall，1998；Dorn，1994）。在这里，一长串艺术学习项目被引入文献中，这些项目被认为可以促进、阐明或增强其他领域的学习（Catterall，1998）。例如，一系列认知能力、性格和态度被发现与艺术学习（包括视觉艺术、音乐、舞蹈和戏剧）有关，包括创造力、想象力和批判性思考的能力。事实上，想象力、批判性和创造性思维也被发现与其他能力有关，例如集中精力、集中感知、进行反思、通过改变方向表现出灵活性、探索新的可能性以及阐述想法的能力（Catterall，1998；Eisner，1998；Getzels 和 Csikszentmihalyi，1976）。除了创造力和想象力之外，艺术中还涉及其他种类的元认知思维，包括以下能力：整合不同的观点、层次关系，以及构建统一的整体——换句话说，在复杂形式内的关系之间构建连贯性——如绘画、音乐作品、编舞或诗歌（Eisner，1998；Perkins，1994）。从另一个方向来看，过去十年进行的一系列研究发现，经过视觉艺术和音乐的创造性和欣赏体验后，小学生在写作、阅读和阅读理解以及言语表达方面取得了进步（Catterall，1998；Luftig，1994；Moore和Caldwell，1993；Redfield，1990）。 ……
The Issue of Transfer The issue of transfer from the arts to other subject disciplines has almost become a leitmotif of arts education - unhappily it has almost come to define what we do! Perhaps because the arts have lost ground in recent years, it has become almost axiomatic to claim their importance in learning to read, write and compute, or in learning other subjects. Advocates have been anxious to demonstrate that experiences in the arts can advance the general education of K-12 pupils, in particular through the development of higher order thinking skills. As our research team read through the accumulated literature we began to see that the value laden and somewhat strident claims often skewed research endeavors by coloring them with the needs of advocacy. Put directly, most studies of transfer in the 1980s and 1990s have been framed by a unidirectional and linear model of learning in which certain capacities engendered in the arts are thought to travel to other subject disciplines and to be "causal" in supporting enhanced learning. Despite its attractiveness, there are two major problems with this as a theoretical model of learning. First, together with Gardner's (1983) more situated theory of multiple intelligences, neuroscience has given us a broader picture of the human mind actively creating connections and associations across a broad front of stimuli - or across intelligences. Thus, there is no reason to believe that learning from other subject disciplines does not in some fashion also "travel back to enhance arts learning." Second, capacities usually identified as "engendered in arts learning," such as creativity, imagination, critical and divergent thinking, are also dimensions that are widely held to characterize thinking in other subject domains (Burton, 1995; Gardner 1983; Greene, 1995; Perkins, 1987). In other words, perceptions of transfer may well be, in part, a function of the degree to which different disciplines share certain cognitive elements, dispositions, or ways of thinking. Given this, one can hardly argue that the acquisition of such capacities in the arts are "causal" to their emergence or enhancement in other disciplines. A Taxonomy of Effects However, while unidirectional causality may be a disputable claim, this hardly rules out the existence of some sort of effect implicating arts learning in learning in other subject domains! Thus, transfer, if and where it exists, may be part of a larger constellation of impacts of arts learning on other subjects. Indeed, while there have been some dramatic failures to find what has been defined as transfer, there also have been some dramatic successes (Catterall, 1998; Dorn, 1994). Here, a long list of arts learning items have been introduced into the literature, which have been seen to boost, illuminate, or enhance learning in other domains (Catterall, 1998). For example, a list of cognitive capacities, dispositions, and attitudes that have been found to be implicated in arts learning-across visual arts, music, dance, and drama-include creativity, imagination, and the ability to think critically. Indeed imaginative, critical, and creative thinking have also been found to implicate other capacities such as the ability to centralize energy, focus perception, engage in reflection, show Flexibility by changing directions, explore new possibilities, and elaborate on ideas (Catterall, 1998, Eisner, 1998; Getzels and Csikszentmihalyi, 1976). Beyond creativity and imagination, other kinds of meta-cognitive thinking have been implicated in the arts, involving the ability to: integrate divergent points of view, layer relationships, and construct unified wholes -in other words, construct coherence among relationships within complex forms-as in paintings, musical compositions, choreography, or poems (Eisner, 1998; Perkins, 1994). Looked at from the other direction, a steady stream of studies carried out over the past decade have found gains in writing, reading and reading comprehension, and verbal expression among elementary age children following creative and appreciative experiences in visual arts and music (Catterall, 1998; Luftig, 1994; Moore and Caldwell, 1993; Redfield, 1990). …