|
|
ENQUIRE PROJECT DETAILS BY GENERAL PUBLIC |
| Project Details |
| Funding Scheme : | General Research Fund | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Project Number : | 18603617 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Project Title(English) : | An investigation of the use of group dialogue and questioning strategies with primary school students learning visual arts in museums and schools | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Project Title(Chinese) : | 在展館及教室學習視覺藝術 : 小學師生對話及提問策略研究 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Principal Investigator(English) : | Dr Tam, Cheung On | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Principal Investigator(Chinese) : | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Department : | Department of Cultural and Creative Arts | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Institution : | The Education University of Hong Kong | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| E-mail Address : | cotam@eduhk.hk | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Tel : | 29487066 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Co - Investigator(s) : |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Panel : | Humanities, Social Sciences | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Subject Area : | Education | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Exercise Year : | 2017 / 18 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Fund Approved : | 725,242 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Project Status : | Completed | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Completion Date : | 30-6-2020 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Project Objectives : |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Abstract as per original application (English/Chinese): |
Art museums are places where students learn from original artworks. Previous scholarship on museum education has placed the emphasis either on visitors’ experiences or on outcomes of learning gained from museum visits. There is a lack of empirical research into group dialogue – the most used education strategy in museums and the most basic component of teaching in classrooms. The proposed study will investigate the group dialogues conducted by teachers with students in museums and classrooms. Three modes of dialogue proposed by Hubard (2015) – predetermined, thematic and open – will be tested with primary school teachers and students. ‘Design-based research’, a method to identify improvements systematically from experiments in learning situations, will be the methodology employed.
The study will be conducted in three phases. Phase 1 will involve the preparation of teacher participants for leading group dialogues and curriculum plan development. Ten teachers and about 270 sixth-grade students (age 12) from different primary schools will be invited to participate in the study. Five workshops on effective group dialogue strategy will be conducted for the teacher participants. They will develop two five- to six-week curriculum plans with each incorporating one museum visit. Phase 2 will focus on the implementation of the plans with the support of the investigators and the evaluation of teachers’ and students’ performance in the group dialogue. Data will be obtained from the teachers’ reflections, interviews, observations and video recordings of museum visits and classroom teaching before, during and after the implementation of the plans. Phase 3 will be the data analysis stage. Taking the Hong Kong context into consideration, the results of the study will be used to create a pedagogical model that is theoretically and practically sound.
The study is particularly meaningful given the increased emphasis that has been placed on learning art criticism in the new Education Bureau Visual Arts (VA) curriculums. In the revised VA curriculum for primary one to secondary three levels, it is explicitly stated that art making should be learned in connection with art criticism. The study will also be a timely response to the development of the West Kowloon Cultural District. In 2019, the Museum+ will be launched and the Hong Kong Museum of Art will be re-opened after renovation. There will be numerous opportunities for students and members of the public to visit these purpose-built museums. In this connection, an educated audience and refined museum practices are much needed. 在展館及教室學習視覺藝術 : 小學師生對話及提問策略研究 藝術館是學生認識藝術原作的地方。過往有關藝術館教育的研究成果不是強調觀者的經驗，便是參觀藝術館於學習上的效用。小組對話 (Group dialogue) 是藝術館裏最常用的教學策略和學校教室中最基本的教學元件。然而，有關小組對話的實証研究卻相當缺乏。本研究將探討於藝術館和課室場景裡展開的師生對話。由Hubard (2015) 倡議的三種對話模式－預定式、主題式和開放式－將於小學教師和學生身上實踐和進行測試。本研究會採用設計研究法 (Design-based Research)，有系統地檢視對話及提問教學方法的成效。 本研究將會分為三個階段實行。第一階段為教師參與者提供訓練，學習帶領小組對話和建立課程計劃。八位教師和約二百二十位小六學生（約十二歲）會受邀自不同小學參與研究計劃。研究中共有五次工作坊，訓練教師帶領小組對話及不同的提問策略。教師會建立兩個為期五至六週的教學單元，每個單元均包含一次藝術館參觀活動。第二階段是教學單元的實施和評估。教師參與者將在研究者的支援下實行各自的單元教學。他們與學生在小組對話的表現將會被紀錄及評估。研究數據會取自教學單元實施前和後的教師教學自省記錄、訪問、教室及藝術館的觀察和錄影。第三階段則為數據分析。結合香港的情境，本研究的結果將能用作建立兼具理論和實踐的小組對話教學模式。 鍳於教育局於新的視覺藝術課程中強調學習藝術評賞的重要性，本研究的義意顯得尤其重大。修訂後的視覺藝術課程（小一至中三），明確指出藝術創作的學習應該與藝術評賞連繫。此外，本研究亦適時響應西九龍文化區的發展。在二零一九年，M+展館將會啟用，而香港藝術館經修葺後亦於同年重新開放。學生與公眾人士將會有大量機會參觀各展館。配合文化區的落成，曾受觀賞教育的觀眾尤為本地所需。 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Realisation of objectives: | Objective 1: To identify and describe the ways in which teachers translate group dialogue and questioning strategies into practice in the art museum and classroom context. The researcher synthesised Feldman’s (1992) art criticism model, the ‘seven questions’ approach proposed by Bell (2011), the four ‘Ways In’ questioning framework developed by Charman, Rose and Wilson (2006), Wolff and Geahigan’s (1997) inquiry-based art criticism learning, the Visual Thinking Strategies developed by Yenawine (2013), and Rorty’s (2014) interrogating questions and proposed a dialogue and questioning framework which was used as the experimental tool. The framework consists of six domains: Personal Connection, Observation, Visual Analysis, Context, Interpretation and Judgment. Teacher participants learned about and practiced the framework in a two-day workshop. During the development of the framework for each iteration of teaching in schools and museums, the researchers visited the teachers and provided suggestions for improvement, such as the selection of artworks, formulation of questions, and the design of relevant teaching activities. Objective 2: To field test and refine the group dialogue and questioning strategies at the senior primary school level. The study involved teachers, students and independent raters. Eight teacher participants were recruited. After the workshop, each teacher conducted five iterations of experimenting the dialogue and questioning framework in the 2018-19 school year, with three in classrooms and two in museums. Each iteration was between 25 and 40 minutes long. One teacher withdrew for medical reasons and thus only seven teachers and 187 sixth-grade students completed the study. A rubric consisting of six evaluative domains was developed by the researcher to assess the quality of the teacher-student dialogues. The dialogues were given a score from one to six in each domain by independent raters. The teacher participants were interviewed individually before the training and after each of the iterations in schools. The pre-training interview focused on the teachers’ original practice, their expectations of and difficulties with engaging students through questions in their art lessons. The post-iteration interviews focused on the improvements that had taken place after each iteration, the difficulties the teachers had encountered, and the impact they observed on teaching and learning. After all the iterations, a group interview was conducted which focused on the refinement of the dialogue and questioning framework. Objective 3: To develop and propose effective group dialogue and questioning strategies for primary school students learning visual arts. A dialogue and questioning framework has been developed: Personal Connection • Facilitate personal responses to and reflections on artworks • Focus on the connection between viewers’ personal experience, values and emotions related to the work • The main question: How do I participate in this viewing experience? • Curiosity and wonder about the work • Personal connections/views/thoughts and critical reflections on the work Observation • Lead viewers to observe and describe the work in detail • Prepare viewers to collect visual data for further investigation • Focus on the objects/events/matters depicted or presented in the work • The main question: What is happening in the work? What can I observe? • Able to observe and describe the work comprehensively Visual Analysis • Guide viewers to analyse the work from a formalistic/aesthetic/perceptual perspective • Focus on the visual elements and their relationships • The main question: What are the colour, shape, proportion, space, and process of making of the work? • Identification of the use of formal elements and visual organisation • Understanding of the making process and the use of materials Context • Make viewers aware of their incomplete understanding of the work if certain contexts are missing • Assume that the work is a product of culture, reflecting different contexts • The main question: When, where, for whom, and how has the work been created and presented? • Knowledge of relevant contextual information: politics, culture, economy, technology, history, etc. • Understanding of the ways in which the work was created, displayed and appreciated Interpretation • Explore the meanings of the work • Focus on one’s interpretation of the work with explanation and justification • The main question: What are the messages, themes and emotions of the work? • Reasonable, informed and convincing interpretation • Justification of one’s own interpretation Judgment • Guide viewers to rationalise their own judgment • Focus on the critique and judgment of the work • The main question: What is the value of the work? • Argument to support the judgment Objective 4: To investigate the effectiveness of group dialogue and questioning strategies in enhancing student learning of visual arts. A quantitative analysis was conducted on the number of questions asked and the rating of dialogue performance. For the classroom dialogues, the total number of questions asked increased significantly from 395 in the baseline observation to 814 in the third iteration. A series of paired-samples t-tests were conducted to compare the performance of teacher-student dialogues between the baseline teaching and each iteration. In the first iteration, no statistically significant increases were observed in the scores for any of the domains. In the second iteration, there were statistically significant increases in the total score and in the scores for two domains (Personal Connection and Evaluation). In the third iteration, there were statistically significant increases in the total score and in the scores for three domains (Observation, Interpretation and Evaluation). In summary, the overall scores for the classroom dialogues had improved significantly after all except the first iteration. However, the improvements in each domain varied each time. Similar result was found in the number of questions asked in the museum dialogues. There were statistically significant increases in the total score and in the scores of Interpretation and Evaluation in the first iteration and Visual Analysis and Interpretation in the second iteration. Objective 5: To evaluate the impact and outcomes of group dialogue and questioning strategies on student learning of visual arts. Diverse perspectives on the investigation of artworks In the baseline teaching, the teachers had a relatively narrow focus and investigation of artworks was primarily used as a preparation for the ensuing art making activities. However, in the three iterations, the students were exposed to different kinds of information either discovered by themselves or prompted by teachers. These changes had enabled the students to construct more personal, diversified and contextual interpretations of artworks, rather than simply giving superficial responses. Ownership of /involvement in the investigation of a work The dialogue and questioning framework provided students with a learning experience with a greater sense of ownership. It was observed from the baseline teaching that most of the students lacked sufficient skills or knowledge to make visual analyses and were afraid to make mistakes. Questions on personal connections provided a relatively easy and comfortable way for students to enter the dialogue. Instead of being detached from the investigation, they became the ones who were investigating. Change from glancing to examining In the three iterations, when the teachers kept guiding and posed more observation questions, the students were stimulated to observe and to discover what could be found out from the artwork. When more content was revealed, the students became curious about what else they could find out from the work. As a result, students became more willing to examine the work and respond to the teacher’s questions. More conceptual development in art making Some of the teachers reported that after a deep investigation of selected artworks, the students displayed a better conceptual design in their own art creations. Some students were used to copying representations or imitating expressions they learned from artworks. However, after a thorough investigation of the artworks, they used more of their own images, representations or expressions to deliver the messages of their artworks. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Summary of objectives addressed: |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Research Outcome | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Major findings and research outcome: | Major Findings A dialogue and questioning framework was developed and tested in schools and museums in five iterations. A quantitative analysis was conducted on the number of questions asked and the rating of dialogue performance. For the teaching in schools, the total number of questions asked increased significantly from 395 in the baseline observation to 814 in the third iteration. A series of paired-samples t-tests were conducted to compare the performance of teacher-student dialogues between the baseline teaching and each iteration. The overall scores for the classroom dialogues improved significantly except in the first iteration. Similar findings were found in the teaching in museums. The results of the study indicated that the dialogue and questioning framework is an effective pedagogy, particularly when teachers were trained to use it. It works well in classroom teaching when the focus was on one or a few artworks. With data collected from teaching observations, rating results and interviews with teacher participants, the followings were observed: Impact on student learning 1. Demonstration of diverse perspectives on the investigation of artworks 2. Ownership of /involvement in the investigation of a work 3. Change from glancing to examining 4. More conceptual development in art making Impact on teaching 1. Concern with students’ ownership of learning and connection to artworks 2. Improved interpretation questioning 3. Introducing judgment questions Research Outcome 1. Publication: Two papers were published in Research in Arts Education (2019) and the Australian Art Education (2019). One paper was submitted to The International Journal of Art & Design Education and under revision. 2. Invited Speech: Three speeches were given at the High School Fine Arts Education Resource Centre, Ministry of Education, Taiwan (04/2019), the National Changhua University of Education (05/2019) and the Virginia Commonwealth University (10/2019). 3. Paper Presentation: Four papers were presented at the InSEA Asia Regional Congress (Hong Kong, 12/2018), the National Visual Art Education Conference (Canberra, 01/2019), the 36th InSEA World Congress (Vancouver, 07/2019), and the International Council of Museums General Conference (Kyoto, 09/2019). 4. Website: 29 dialogue and questioning plans (14 in both English and Chinese and 15 in Chinese) were uploaded to the bilingual website ‘Learning and Teaching Art Criticism’ (www.artcrit.eduhk.hk). As at June 2021, 1,043 teachers and students have registered as members and the website was visited 17,383 times. 5. Workshop: A workshop for the EDB Primary School Visual Arts Professional Learning Community (1/12/2020) and five school workshops (30/10/2018, 30/11/2018, 20/3/2019, 10/11/2020, 19/11/2020) were held for 92 teachers. 6. School Project: A professional development project on dialogue and questioning strategy for four primary schools was initiated by the Christian Alliance S. Y. Yeh Memorial Primary School (8/2020-12/2021). | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Potential for further development of the research and the proposed course of action: |
Consolidating the findings of the study, a 3-hour mini-MOOC was developed and incorporated in one of the researcher’s undergraduate courses. Students took it as part of the course and were required to design a dialogue and questioning plan. The quality of the plans was very good and some of them were uploaded to the researcher’s art criticism website. The mini-MOOC can be developed into a full MOOC for in-service local and overseas teachers. It has the potential to reach a much wider audience and engage teachers to use the dialogue and questioning framework in authentic teaching situations. In the interviews, teachers showed their concerns about connecting art appreciation to the teaching of art making. In teachers’ mind, many questions asked on artworks are directly related to the follow-up creating activities. Even teachers can engage students in talking about artworks, it is a challenge to connect it to art making. In this connection, I worked on a new GRF proposal on connecting art appreciation to art making using a virtual exhibition. The project “Creating Connections: A Study of the Impact and Effectiveness of a Visual Arts Teacher-curator Pedagogy” was funded for implementation in January 2021 (HK$889,420. GRF, 01/2021 – 06/2023). | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Layman's Summary of Completion Report: | The present study investigated the dialogues and questions conducted by teachers with students – the most basic component of teaching in classrooms and the most used education strategy in museums. Synthesizing art criticism models, dialogue approaches and questioning strategies reviewed from the literature, a dialogue and questioning framework was developed and used as the experimental tool. The framework consists of six domains: Personal Connection, Observation, Visual Analysis, Context, Interpretation and Judgment. In the school year of 2018-19, seven primary school teachers experimented the framework with 187 sixth-grade students in five iterations in schools and museums. Data were collected through interviews, observations and video recordings of classroom teaching and museum visits before, during and after the implementation of the plans. A quantitative analysis was conducted on the number of questions asked and the rating of dialogue performance. In both schools and museums, the total number of questions asked increased significantly in the final iteration. There were also statistically significant increases in the total score measuring dialogue performance. The findings of the study indicated that the dialogue and questioning framework is an effective pedagogy, particularly when teachers were trained to use it and when the focus was on one or a few artworks. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Research Output | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Peer-reviewed journal publication(s) arising directly from this research project : (* denotes the corresponding author) |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Recognized international conference(s) in which paper(s) related to this research project was/were delivered : |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Other impact (e.g. award of patents or prizes, collaboration with other research institutions, technology transfer, etc.): |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
| SCREEN ID: SCRRM00542 |