Celebrating the Student-Led Art Lesson

Dr. Ilona Szekely

What does this artwork say about the artist who created it? Or does it say more about the teacher or art program it comes from? What are we saying when we ask students to be creative and express themselves while requiring them to follow specific directions and check off tight rubrics? What can we give students in the art room that is unique? How are we encouraging students as artists and creative thinkers?

A teacher-driven outcome often emphasizes the ability to follow rules and reproduce ideas. These artworks can feel unrelated to the artistic process. What is the reward for a student who completes a repetitive project that results in a hallway full of the same fish or snowmen?

In many art programs, skill development and technical practice have become some of the most important parts of the art classroom, while creative thinking and innovation have become less central. Pre-service art teachers will often share a lesson with me in which skill development is the central focus. My first question is, “Where is the art lesson?”

Many art programs embrace the fundamentals of techniques learned through practice while shying away from unstructured, open-ended ideas that express emotion and the personal qualities young artists bring to their work. The rubric has become an essential part of many art programs, asking students to incorporate certain ideas and stay close to the assignment and directions.

Yet, in art, there is no single rubric or formula for creating a successful work of art. Certainly, there are processes for developing technical skills and terminology for talking about art. But, at the end of the day, when at work in their studios, artists are finding their own way and developing their own set of rules.

Copying has long been used as a means of learning in the visual arts. According to Macnamara, “When the Louvre was first opened to the public in 1793, it set aside five of every ten days exclusively for artists to study and copy its collection.” Nearly two centuries later, “in the early 1970s, artists and museums in a few locations began to revive copying. Until 1931, the Metropolitan Museum of Art, like many others, had a special room where artists could work from objects of their choosing without being disturbed by the general public.”

Reproducing an idea that the teacher has come up with benefits students by allowing them to follow the directions of the exercise. There are technical skills to be learned from following directions for perspective or a particular painting technique. But if our larger goal is to teach students about art, innovation, and creative thinking, we might step back and ask: How do projects that ask students to copy do that? Are we asking students to think critically, develop new ideas, and think and work as artists?

While there is tradition and value in the practice of copying and reproducing artworks, teaching students to become artists also means showing them how they can embrace new ideas and innovative thinking. We need to ask: Is this the space where technique needs to be separated from opportunities for students to create art on their own? How much practice with a technique is needed before students are ready to make art independently? Is the five-point rubric the goal, or is the goal to create a unique, individualized piece of art?

While a teacher might not feel comfortable displaying experimental or unconventional work in the hallway, sending it home to parents, or showing it to the principal, there is value to be found in the process. As teachers, we need to look for ways to hold these moments up proudly and recognize that a personal and unique piece of art is a triumph in a way that narrowly supervised projects might not be.

Can process be promoted? Can achievement be attributed to a student who stuck with an idea, even when it became challenging?

As artists, we know that not every day is good, nor is every piece worth celebrating. Yet, knowing that experimenting and innovating will eventually result in something of significance to keep is worth the effort.

Dr. Ilona Szekely is a senior professor of art education at Eastern Kentucky University. ilona.szekely@eku.edu