The Relationship of Art Instruction, Grade-Level, and Gender on Third- and Seventh-Grade Student Drawings

Abstract

Art instruction in elementary schools is an old issue in art education. While working in several states that have very few elementary art specialists and recognizing this condition exists in many parts of the nation, I became interested in examining what elementary school children might be missing. This study grew out of a continuing concern about the effect a lack of formal art instruction may have on students' learning in grades K-6. Since 1992, my interest in this topic has resulted in this and one other published paper (Brewer, 1995), a number of presentations at national art education conferences, and will be the basis for further research. This study has implications for the curriculum, instruction, and student learning categories established in Creating a Research Agenda (NAEA, 1994). In addition to these broader purposes, it has been my experience that middle school art teachers often remark that seventh-grade students who have not had formal elementary art instruction create underdeveloped and stereotypical drawings. In this study, children's drawings are thought of as conceptual and perceptual indicators of student learning, cognitive growth, and development. It is also assumed that art work is a vitally important part of students' achievement in art education and general education. This causal-comparative study examines whether a lack of formal elementary art instruction affects the overall quality of children's thematic and observational drawings. Students in grades three and seven are the focus of this study. Along with the grade factors (within and between third and seventh) and the instruction factors (present or absent), both drawing factors (thematic and observational) are analyzed by gender factors (female and male). Art instruction in this study is not a controlled independent variable, but it is an overall factor, because students in selected schools either receive or do not receive formal elementary art instruction. Here, drawings are not the result of ongoing instruction, but are one-time experimental tasks. Many of the goals of this study are in line with the NAEP Visual Arts Assessment and Exercise Specifications (College Board, 1994), which states it is important to assess and report findings on exercises or tasks that can be compared across, as well as between, grade levels. The NAEP Committee believes there are many instances in which fourth grade students with training in an arts discipline would perform at higher levels on some exercises than eighth grade students who have had little or no training. Related Research This review first examines two relevant and timely research studies. One is a 1977 report by the National Assessment of Education Progress (NAEP), and the other is a study conducted by Brewer in 1995. The second section of this review addresses several researchers' and writers' viewpoints about the educational benefit of students' involvement, instruction, and learning in art. The Design and Drawing Skills report (NAEP, 1977) addresses many objectives and variables pertinent to this study. With a NAEP art assessment and report planned for 1997, a reexamination of the work done in 1977 is of particular value and interest. Readers may want to refer to two recent documents for insights into the background, purpose, and methodology of the art education portion of the 1997 assessment: Issues Concerning a National Assessment of Arts Education (1993) by the Council of Chief State School Officers and the NAEP Visual Arts Assessment and Exercise Specifications (1994) prepared by the College Board and distributed by the NAEA. The 1977 NAEP report was part of a comprehensive attempt to measure student achievement in art at the elementary, junior high, and high school levels on a national scale. The basic philosophy behind the 1977 assessment was that knowledge and skill acquisition in art are integral to personal appreciation and fulfillment in the arts. …