The Problem of Communication in Art Education: The Need for a Theory of Description

Abstract

In his Autobiography, Bertrand Russell relates that at one time he was completely baffled by the contradictory meanings implicit in the following words, written upon each side of a single sheet of paper: The statement on the other side of this paper is false. Russell pondered the problem until realizing the resolution of apparent contradiction lay in an explanation of how the ambiguities of word structure and syntaxical order affect the meaning of philosophical statements. Thus a Theory of Description for verbal and written phenomena was formulated which accounted for seemingly contradictory statements in philosophical analysis. In the area of art education, as well as others, the salient statements of principle, definition, and technique require a modifying commentary so as explain the distinctive operation of the elements of a sentence for our special purposes. In the sciences this notion of qualification and description of statements has been developed through the conception of theoretical models of behavior, such as those of quantum mechanics, which provide controls and a standard against which propositions in the field may be checked. It is, sum up, a frame of reference problem and may be resolved some extent by the creation of either a model of behavior with verbal correlation or a theoretical model of description which itself may be used for the formulation of general hypotheses in the field. Each discipline requires a manner of describing the particular verbal template through which it views the world. In art education, the necessary conditions for proposing a theory of description are evident. First, there is a lack of agreement by writers in the field as the meaning of commonly used words and phrases. A sentence such as The creative child expresses his experience is a complex proposition, the meaning of which is difficult ascertain precisely because art educators lack a theoretical model for standardizing the verbal phenomena used in description. There is no general basis appeal for modifying common-usage words for the special requirements of art education. Terms such as creative, perception, expression, and artistic are overlaid with multiple meanings, some more appropriate art education than others. For example, consider the verb to perceive. There are numerous acceptable meanings in ordinary usage; to runs the definitional gamut from sensory impression cognitive understanding. But would it not be helpful in art education if such multi-definitional words as perceive were categorically narrowed apply fewer cases of verbal phenomena? A suggestion proposed here for illustration might be restrict the location of perceive statements indicating visual scanning only, or that class of behavior in which a person merely looks at objects without scrutinizing, analyzing, or identifying them for information. Thus art educators writing about observation of art works might distinguish the act of physically view-