“Do not touch it!†Today’s Children’s Visual Competencies in Comparison with the Pre-Digital Era in Light of their Art Educational Environment
Abstract
The task of twenty-first century art education is to contribute to the blossoming of the child’s personality. In this article, I approach this challenge from two principal directions, both of which provide a window onto unfamiliar terrain. This project sought to answer the following research questions: How do plastic, spatial (3D) creative capacities develop, and how do they compare with the kindergarten’s accustomed advancement of picture-creating, planar (2D) capabilities? How do kindergartners’ skills as measured in the 1970s compare with those of kindergartners today? A follow-on project examined children’s skills in the context of built environment education, asking the questions: Where, and with whom, do children find the best conditions for creation and arts education? What kinds of environments are most favourable? The results showed a clear deterioration of children’s drawing development from 1974 until today, as well as from drawings in both studies to modelling today. However, a more promising discovery was that depictions of movement appear much sooner in the case of plastic arts works than in drawings. This opens the way to an orientation that in our increasingly urbanised world, can help our children grow into adults who responsibly shape our environment, sensitive to their own age, as self-possessed problem solvers, employing the toolkit of education through art. The study is based on ongoing, long-term research of the 3612+ Visual Skills Lab group, employing both qualitative and quantitative methods to evaluate the artistic proficiencies of nearly a thousand children, mostly aged 3–7, in dozens of kindergartens in Hungary, through hands-on exercises as well as surveys of teachers, parents and other interested parties.
Downloads
References
Bodóczky, I. (2000). Az értékelés problémái a vizuális nevelésben [The problems of assessment in visual education]. Iskolakultúra, 10(6-7), 15.
Bodóczky, I. (2003). Vizuális nevelés [Visual education]. Magyar Iparművészeti Egyetem.
Bodor, P. (Ed.) (2013). Szavak, képek, jelentés. KvalitatÃv kutatási olvasókönyv [Words, pictures, meaning: Qualitative research reader]. L’Harmattan.
Golomb, C. (1974). Young children’s sculpture and drawing – A study in representational development. Harvard University Press.
Guba, A., Pataky, G., & Tóth, E. (2017). ÉpÃtett környezeti nevelés az óvodában [Built environment education in the kindergarten]. Magyar ÉpÃtész Kamara, kultúrAktÃv.
Inspectorate of Education / Ministry of Culture and Science [Inspectie van het Onderwijs / Ministerie van Cultuur en Wetenschap]. (2017). Rapport Peil. Kunstzinnige oriëntatie 2015–2016 [The Peil Report. Artistic orientation 2015–2016]. https://www.onderwijsinspectie.nl/documenten/rapporten/2017/03/27/rapport-kunstzinnige-orientatie
Kárpáti, A., & Pataky, G. (2016). A közös európai vizuális műveltség referenciakeret [The European framework of reference for visual literacy]. A Neveléstudomány folyóirat, Új perspektÃvák a művészetpedagógiában, 1, 6–21. http://nevelestudomany.elte.hu/index.php/2016/04/a-kozos-europai-vizualis-muveltseg-referenciakeret/
Katona, F. (2001). „Az öntudat újraébredése†A humán idegrendszer ontogenesise [“The reawakening of consciousnessâ€: The ontogenesis of the human nervous system]. Medicina Könyvkiadó.
Kirchner, C., & Kirschenmann, J. (2015). Kunst unterrichten. Didaktische Grundlagen und schülerorientierte Vermittlung [Teaching art: Didactic foundations and pupil-oriented mediation]. Friedrich Verlag.
Lakatos B., M. (2007). „Kör, kör, ki játszikâ€. Mire tanÃtanak a népi játékok? [“Circle, circle, who is playing?†What do folk games teach us?]. In I. Bollókné Panyik (Ed.), Gyermek-, Nevelés-, Pedagógusképzés (pp. 103–116). Trezor Kiadó. http://vmek.oszk.hu/09100/09191/09191.pdf
Mitchell, W. J. T. (1994). Picture theory: Essays on verbal and visual representation. University of Chicago Press.
Mitchell, W. J. T. (2004). What do pictures want? The lives and loves of images. University of Chicago Press.
OECD. (2005). The definition and selection of key competencies. Executive summary. www.oecd.org/edu/statistics/deseco-OLSAT
Paál, Ã. (1970). A gyermekrajzok fejlÅ‘désének motivációi [The motivations for the development of children’s drawings]. Magyar Pszichológiai Szemle, 27(4), 373–378.
Pataky, G. (2011). Object making and design in the visual education of children aged 6–12 in the light of a diagnostic survey. In A. Kárpáti & E. Gaul (Eds.), InSEA World Congress (pp. 182–193). HATA.
Pataky, G. (2012). Vizuális képességek fejlÅ‘dése 6-12 éves korban, a tárgykultúra tanÃtásának területén [The development of visual skills at the age of 6–12 years in the field of teaching object making]. ELTE TÓK.
Pataky, G. (2016). Nutzung des Kompetenzstrukturmodells in der Forschung – Dokumentation eines Vorhabens in Ungarn [The use of the competence structure model in the research – Documentation of a project in Hungary]. In E. Wagner & D. Schönau (Eds.), Cadre Europ.en Commun de Référence pour la Visual Literacy (pp. 372–379). Waxmann.
Pataky, G. (2017a). Plasztikai képességek fejlÅ‘dése 3–7 éves korban a CEFR_VL kompetenciamodell tükrében. Diagnosztikus vizsgálat a sÃkbeli (2D) és a térbeli (3D) alkotások körébÅ‘l a vizuális nevelés rendszerében [Plastic skills development from age 3 to 7 years in the mirror of the CEFR_VL Competence Model. Diagnostic study of 2D and 3D creations within the structure of visual education]. Gyermeknevelés, 5(1), 171–187. http://old.tok.elte.hu/gyermekneveles/17_1_szam/pub/pataky.pdf
Pataky, G. (2017b). Nicht anfassen! Veränderung der zeichnerischen und plastischen Fähigkeiten von Kinder im Vergleich von heute mit 1974 [Hands off! Changes in drawing and plastic skills of today’s children in comparison with the ones in 1974]. Werkspuren 2. https://werkspuren.ch/
Pataky, G., & Rekvényi, V. (2017). How is the optimal art education space created in the digital era? Art education research in the light of teacher training students’ critical views in two European countries (Hungary and Scotland). 35th InSEA World Congress, Daegu, Korea. http://www.insea2017.org/download/InSEA2017_ProgramBooK.pdf
Reulecke, W., & Rollett, B. (1976). Pädagogische Diagnostik und lernzielorientiertes Tests [Pedagogical diagnostics and learning goal-oriented tests]. In K. Pawlik (Ed.), Diagnose und Diagnostik (pp. 179–185). Klett.
Szőkéné Halász, É. (2010). Pszichológiai és pedagógiai ismeretek [Psychological and pedagogical knowledge]. http:/www.humantiszk.hu/modularis_jegyzetek/6_1_szokene.pdf
Tóth, E., & Pataky, G. (2019). Why architecture and the built environment matters in art education. In M. Kallio-Tavin & O. Sushchenko (Eds.), Scientific and Social interventions in art education 2 (pp. 29–35). Special Issue of InSEA Congress 2018. https://wiki.aalto.fi/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=148283892
Wagner, E., & Schönau, D. (Eds.) (2016). Cadre Europen Commun de Référence pour la Visual Literacy – Prototype.
In order to ensure both the widest dissemination and protection of material published in CEPS Journal, we ask Authors to transfer to the Publisher (Faculty of Education, University of Ljubljana) the rights of copyright in the Articles they contribute. This enables the Publisher to ensure protection against infringement.