LTC 8740 - Day 3

New Symbols designed by my 4th Grade students, inspired by Olivia Gude's presentation at the MU Art Ed Symposium, my favorites include Bacon Crossing, Fainting Goats, Gangnam Style, and No Ballerinas Allowed.

Transmediation as a Metaphor for New Literacies in Multimedia –

Transmediation, as defined by the author -“taking understandings from one system and moving them into another sign system.”

The bulk of education is spent on the mechanics of teaching children to read and write, little time is spent teaching meaning making or meaning comprehension of the complex multisensory world in which they live. The process of transmediation actively involves the analysis of text through varied and complex methods, it facilitates the process of students demonstrating the knowledge and skills they bring in from the outside, and is an excellent platform for students to explore social justice.

Eisner says, “In a metaphoric sense, becoming multiliterate means being able to inscribe or decode meaning in different forms of representation.” (p 22) Yet Semali and Fuyo assert “…emphasis on these multiple forms of representation continues to be seen as innovation.” At the 2013 Art Ed Symposium both Dr. Unrath and Dr. Gude stressed the importance of art educators seizing the opportunity to embrace transmediation as part of the art curriculum. I believe it was Gude who cautioned that some other field of education would gladly latch onto what rightfully belongs to visual arts educators. I could not agree more. “Students bring what they know and have learned in their communities into the classroom.” Again, this is in agreement with Eisner, the idea that meaning depends on what the individual brings to the experience. (p17)

Freedman Chapter 3  The Social Life of Art

The importance of establishing connections between the art of the past to the present assists in helping students understand the complexities of the world. Seeing these connections involves the ability to see how the past relates to the present, as well as to the future. Freedman warns that history is not the past, but a reconstruction of the past. Art history frequently fails to omit details such as social, political, and economic concerns during the time the art was created, so tend to present a very linear timeline. “From this perspective, actions and events seem to be discrete bits of time, independent of the historical and cultural frameworks that make them possible and outside the multidimensional medium of time and space that suspend them.” Art history for postmodern times devotes greater attention to social and cultural issues. In order for art history to make sense it needs to touch students in meaningful ways and establish connections both inside as well as outside the classroom. It is critical that students have context on which to base judgments about art.

Chapter 3 pinged so much off of Eisner that I began writing PING – Eisner all over the notes I was taking. Meaningful connections – PING, inside and outside the classroom – PING, PING. (It was like a pinball machine in my head!) However, there were two things that really got my attention. One was the reference to the bad example of the “art in the dark” art history teaching method. I understood completely, as for nine credit hours as an undergraduate I endured the painful process of sitting in a darkened auditorium, early in the morning, usually after closing down Old Barney’s, my favorite pub. Is it any wonder that the only piece of art from all of that history I remember is The Venus of Willendorf, now known as the Woman of Willendorf? The other, was the passage, “Much of what we teach are remnants of knowledge.” (p 49) I think that art history is an area of personal weakness in my teaching. Freedman tells us that by enabling student to make those connections between then and now creates greater knowledge, and PING to Eisner, I see this as part of that symbiotic relationship – “by responding to the contributions of others, in turn we provide others with material to which they respond.” (Eisner p 57) Does that make sense? I can now see a clear reason for doing a better job in teaching art history and I’m starting to envision some fun and meaningful ways to do so.

Freedman Chapter 4  Art and Cognition, Knowing Visual Culture

“The relationship between form, feeling, and knowing is an important part of cognitive processing.” (p 82) The ability to critically understand visual culture involves the viewer’s ability to relate what they see to previous knowledge. The brain seeks out patterns and relationships to previous knowledge, and it is through this process that learning takes place. It is a natural response to try to interpret the message that an artist is trying to communicate. Visual culture is understood differently depending on the education and experience of the viewer. (PING to Houssen and VTS) In order for learning to take place, students need to participate in interpretation and analysis. Freedman asserts that Postmodern art education should include Constructivism, distributed cognition (“…the understanding that in the real world, objects and people are part of not only what we know, but how we know.” P 83) , and situated knowledge as methods which foster growth.

Although Freedman's style of writing is difficult for me, ( Eisner I would add to my list of dinner party guests, Freedman, not so much) given my previous experience with VTS, I have to say that chapter four was one where I actually understood what she was saying the first time I read it. My brain could see the relationship to what it already understood about constructivism and collective meaning! As a side note, just a few days ago my husband and I were speculating the reasons "why censored imagery of the past that greatly angered some viewers may seem tame to us now." (p 64) My reasonings were pretty much in line with Freedman's, how strange is that?