Project Zero Research Articles

A Study on "Project Zero" at Harvard Universityin the Perspective of Musiceducation

A Study on "Project Zero" at Harvard Universityin the Perspective of Musiceducation

Secondary level esa education demonstrations per soyuz mission

The objective of these education demonstrations was to explain and record basic scientific phenomena common to the European secondary school curriculum, in weightless conditions on board the International Space Station (ISS). Video taken during the Cervantes, Delta and Eneide Missions of the results, have been incorporated into a series of ESA educational DVD lessons for distribution to secondary schools within ESA Member States, respectively entitled: Project Zero Gravity, Mission 1: Newton in Space, Mission 2: Body Space, and Mission 3: Space Matters.

Essay: Development of children's creativity to foster peace

Peace-making as merely a subdiscipline of statecraft has little value when any small group can cause unimaginable destruction, and violence becomes a socially accepted response to perceived threats. For a global culture of peace to be built, the next generation must be imbued with new systems of thinking and feeling. Such approaches are the domain of cognitive science, translated through practice into perceptual and behavioural change. This essay describes an art-based programme to develop creativity and empathy in young people living in a confl ict zone. Research suggests that creativity can be nurtured by a holistic approach to child development encompassing cognitive, physical, and emotional capacity. Heilman and colleagues wrote that “although extensive knowledge and divergent thinking are critical for creativity, they alone are insuffi cient for allowing a person to fi nd the thread that unites. Finding this thread might require the building of diff erent forms of knowledge ... through coactivation and communication between regions of the brain that ordinarily are not strongly connected.” The arts can aid a child’s holistic development, especially empathy, which is defi ned as the ability to identify and express one’s own emotions and to read another’s emotions correctly and comprehensively. A RAND study noted that the communicative and personal nature of creative expression, accentuated through collective arts activities, can forge social bonds while supporting identity formation and cultural transmission. The power of the group transcends the sum of individual eff orts. A working hypothesis is that the arts stimulate a problem-fi nding attitude that can be used in non-arts areas, including confl ict resolution. David Perkins of Harvard Project Zero has argued that the arts provide a sensory anchor, are instantly accessible, and engage and sustain attention, thereby encouraging rich connections. Such beliefs are supported by testimonials from children who have taken part in creative arts programmes developed by the International Child Art Foundation (ICAF): creativity “leads us to innovation”; “lets me express what I think and feel in diff erent ways”; and “decorates the artwork with a sense of uniqueness”. ICAF has developed methods to nurture the innate creativity and intrinsic empathy of children and young people. With nearly a decade’s experience, ICAF programmes initiate a developmental and sequential process of healing, creativity, communication, empathy, and cooperation. This progression is illustrated in the Peace through Arts approach, developed after the attacks in the USA on Sept 11, 2001. The initiative was spurred on by the spontaneous artistic expressions of sadness and support from children in the USA and around the world who sent ICAF their unsolicited works. The approach aims to diminish the transgenerational transmission of trauma and hatred, and draws on the creativity and imagination of young people in teaching them the ethics of responsibility and mutual respect. It fi rst helps children to recognise their responses to trauma, then to understand the reasons for confl ict and how artistic expression can reduce tensions. Subsequent modules impart confi dence and develop empathy through the experience of collective creativity and provide action steps for children to apply their creativity toward building a vision of peace in their communities. The Cypriot Peace through Art project is a good example. The 3-week programme in Washington DC involved ten Greek-Cypriot and ten Turkish-Cypriot children, then aged 14–15 years, who had grown up on opposite sides of the “green line” that partitions Cyprus. Participants were selected on the basis of an art competition organised by the Cyprus Fulbright Commission. Before going to Washington, each participant constructed a poster board titled “Myself”, describing his or her home and family, hobbies, pets, and favourite things to do. At the fi rst meeting, the poster boards served to overcome the teenagers’ natural hesitation in introducing themselves. They continued to explore issues of self-identity and “the other” in their fi rst activity, which was to produce artistic impressions. For Ashfaq Ishaq is Executive Director of the International Child Art Foundation, which uses the arts to enable children to lead us to a better and safer world by developing their innate creativity and intrinsic empathy.

Projet Zéro: présentation et application pédagogique du cadre conceptuel "Teaching for Understanding"

The study of learning processes in the artistic disciplines was, in the 1960's, the principal concern of Nelson Goodman. This vast research project named very quickly expanded to many other disciplines. The pedagogical approach called Teaching for Understanding developed by Project Zero deals in particular with the phenomenon of comprehension within the learning process. What does it mean to understand something? What do we want our students to understand? A pupil demonstrates comprehension of knowledge (to know, know-how, etc) when he/she is able to apply this knowledge. To understand something is to see it from new perspectives, and to use it in pursuit of further knowledge and to do this autonomously. Four strongly related components ensure the coherence of the methodological and teaching framework and provide opportunities to reach a true comprehension. Teaching for Understanding is now the methodological and teaching framework of reference for many teachers on the other side of the Atlantic and for certain International schools in Europe . The central goal is a deeper understanding of the knowledge, rooted firmly in the reality of the learner.

Looking at Student Work for Teacher Learning, Teacher Community, and School Reform

Teachers are usually alone when they examine student and think about student performance. The authors describe several projects that have enabled teachers to leave the isolation of their own classrooms and think together about student in the broader contexts of school improvement and professional development. IN 1995, WHEN the California Center for School Restructuring convened teams from nearly 150 elementary and secondary schools to examine the progress of local school reform and its impact on student achievement, it employed the slogan Examining student for what matters most.1 The precise meaning of the slogan was left open for school teams to define. For some, it meant assembling and examining school-level achievement data. For others, it meant using rubrics to assess student essays, projects, or portfolios. For still others, it meant considering samples of student for their instructional implications or inviting a panel of students to speak about their opportunities to learn. The years that have passed since that conference testify to a growing conviction that there is something important to be learned by giving close attention to students' experience and students' actual Reform advocates, professional developers, school accreditation agencies, teacher networks, and researchers have increasingly engaged teachers in together at samples of student or analyzing classroom performance.2 Indeed, looking at student work has become the organizing theme of one website (www.lasw.org) and a prominent component of several others.3 It forms a major activity of professional conferences, professional development programs, and reform projects. One might reasonably ask, What's new about teachers at student work? Teachers examine artifacts produced by students all the time. They read, review, grade, and celebrate student every day. However, they do so most often on their own, possibly in conference with a student or parent, but almost always in isolation from colleagues. In recent years, organizations engaged in professional development and school reform have begun bringing teachers together to do collectively what they generally do alone: that is, look at student and think about students' performance in the classroom. In addition to evaluating a teacher's instructional relationships with individual students, the purpose of these collaborative efforts is to foster teacher learning, support for professional community, and the pursuit of school reform. These organizations have also focused on introducing these practices into the ongoing of schools. In this regard, they have ventured into difficult terrain. It was one thing for California's restructuring schools to gather once a year at a conference to examine student It is quite another to transform long-standing workplace traditions of privacy and non-interference by asking teachers to put the of their own students on the table for others to consider and discuss. We have recently completed a two-year study that responds directly to this growing interest in at student In reviewing published descriptions and studies, we discovered a wide range of purposes and practices subsumed under the broad descriptive term looking at student work. The good news for advocates of these practices is that there is emerging evidence that some versions of at student yield benefits for teaching and learning.4 However, the available research gives little sense of how any demonstrated benefits might in fact be achieved.5 While there are promising precedents, the literature offers few specifics regarding the actual practices that teachers employ in at student Our project attempted to make some headway on that problem. Through case studies of teacher groups working with three nationally recognized organizations -- Harvard Project Zero, the Coalition of Essential Schools, and the Academy for Educational Development -- we sought to identify specific practices employed by teachers who come together to examine student in the context of broader programs of school improvement and school-based professional development. …

Beyond the Evidence Given: A Critical Commentary on Critical Links

Click to increase image sizeClick to decrease image size Additional informationNotes on contributorsLois HetlandEllen Winner is at the Department of Psychology, Boston College, and is a colleague of Lois Hetland at Project Zero at the Harvard Graduate School of Education.

The Raw Materials of Reform: Rethinking the Knowledge of School Improvement

Despite widespread conviction that adequateknowledge exists for improving schools, weargue that the knowledge needed for successfulschool reform goes far beyond what is currentlyavailable and accessible. Drawing on theexample of ATLAS, a collaboration among fourexperienced reform organizations in the UnitedStates – the Coalition of Essential Schools,the School Development Program, EducationDevelopment Center, and Harvard Project Zero –we argue that four significant ``problems ofknowledge'' made it difficult to collect,integrate, and use what the members of theseorganizations had learned about schoolimprovement. First, the ATLAS partners quicklyfound that, while they had substantialknowledge and resources in many areas ofschooling, there were many other aspects ofschooling, school change, and organizationaldevelopment where further knowledge wasrequired. Second, even in areas where thepartner organizations had considerableexperience, they often found that it was hardto articulate and share that knowledge in atimely and efficient way. Third, in someinstances, the lessons that members of thepartner organizations took away from theirprevious experiences were either inconsistentwith one another or downright contradictory.Fourth, the difficulties of creating andmaintaining a new collaborative organizationmay have discouraged the development andsharing of knowledge across the partnerorganizations.

Project Zero: Nelson Goodman's Legacy in Arts Education

Project Zero: Nelson Goodman's Legacy in Arts Education

What does it Take to Break the Mold? Rhetoric and Reality in New American Schools

In 1991, the New American Schools Development Corporation (NASDC) was created in order to create “break-the-mold” models for a “new generation of American schools.” NASDC sought to achieve this goal by funding eleven different design teams including the ATLAS Communities Project—a collaboration of the Coalition of Essential Schools, the School Development Program, Harvard Project Zero, and the Education Development Center. While schools associated with ATLAS and the other design teams showed some signs of progress in the first few years of their work, there has been little evidence that these positive outcomes have been achieved by “breaking the mold.” In fact, the NASDC strategy and the ATLAS collaboration may have exacerbated basic conditions that make it difficult for schools and organizations to explore new ideas and develop innovative practices. By drawing on studies of innovation in business organizations, this paper argues that rather than trying to create “break-the-mold” school designs, reformers should aim to create the conditions that allow for a better balance between efforts to explore new ideas that may be successful in the future and the further expansion of practices that have been successful in the past.

What does it Take to Break the Mold? Rhetoric and Reality in New American Schools

In 1991, the New American Schools Development Corporation (NASDC) was created in order to create “break-the-mold” models for a “new generation of American schools.” NASDC sought to achieve this goal by funding eleven different design teams including the ATLAS Communities Project—a collaboration of the Coalition of Essential Schools, the School Development Program, Harvard Project Zero, and the Education Development Center. While schools associated with ATLAS and the other design teams showed some signs of progress in the first few years of their work, there has been little evidence that these positive outcomes have been achieved by “breaking the mold.” In fact, the NASDC strategy and the ATLAS collaboration may have exacerbated basic conditions that make it difficult for schools and organizations to explore new ideas and develop innovative practices. By drawing on studies of innovation in business organizations, this paper argues that rather than trying to create “break-the-mold” school designs, reformers should aim to create the conditions that allow for a better balance between efforts to explore new ideas that may be successful in the future and the further expansion of practices that have been successful in the past.

Project Zero: Nelson Goodman's Legacy in Arts Education

Project Zero: Nelson Goodman's Legacy in Arts Education

Building on children's strengths: the experience of Project Spectrum

The groundbreaking work of Harvard University psychologist Howard Gardner on multiple intelligences and Tufts University psychologist David Henry Feldman on nonuniversal development is fast becoming the standard by which children's intelligence and cognitive development is understood. In this landmark three-volume set, Mara Krechevsky and her colleagues at Project Zero make these insights available for both teachers and scholars alike.

Commentary: On Arguing from Authority

The National Art Education Association has been involved in a major research effort for about 4 years (NAEA, 1996). Concerted and systematically structured research is a necessity for the future health and development of art education and art educators must hope that the efforts of the various research teams will be fruitful, as fruitful, for example, as Harvard's Project Zero, but more focused on the needs of education in the visual arts, rather than on the collection of psychological data (Lanier, 1987). While I am optimistic about the NAEA research teams' efforts, I wonder if there might be greater rewards if they were accompanied by an equally major push for philosophical investigation. I say this not because I have any delusions about own philosophical abilities-far, far from it!-but because I have noticed a strand in art education literature that I regard as a weakness and that I think might be overcome or at least lessened by a greater attention to philosophical grounding within the field. That is, a more thought-out philosophy of art education-distinct from philosophy of art or philosophy of education-is needed. Is this a rather pompous and perhaps vague quasi-proclamation? Maybe ego has fogged reason, but let me try to explain concerns further. I will start by issuing a challenge to readers of art education literature to estimate how many articles they have read in which the validity of the argument depended on acceptance of the notions of Derrida, Foucault, Lacan, or various neo-Marxist theorists? Or perhaps on the writings of currently popular anthropologists, such as Dissanayake or Levi-Strauss? Or psychologists, including Gardner of Project Zero? I further challenge readers to analyze the contents of these articles. How many of them marshal a tremendous amount of theory from outside the field of art education to explain or scrutinize a small scale or even trivial event within art education? I call this using a Sherman Tank for a short ride around the block. The small scale is seldom well-explained by huge and dense theory. Unfortunately, one important area of art education research, participant-observer studies, is prone to this malaise. I say unfortunately because qualitative research seems to promise so much for art education and I often read articles based on this methodology. Participant-observer articles frequently make pleasant reading of a rather anecdotal sort, but the connection to prestigious, usually anthropological theory can seem tenuous if not strained. Perhaps well-reported anecdotes need to be collected and published without so much theory so that solid art educational theory can be developed from that data. Perhaps the grandiose borrowed theories need to be downplayed by art education researchers, editors, and reviewers. However, I am not arguing for know-nothingness but rather, a more lean and tight use of citations of theoretical sources, a little less saying my reasoning is justified by theoretician-flavor-of-the-decade. The most recent champion example of citation after citation of authorities as judgments was not a participant-observer study but an article analyzing an advertisement for the Getty Center of Education in the Art, (jagodzinski, 1997). In one way the analysis was fun. If one enjoys the intellectual equivalent of a Fantasia hippo ballet, then the trouncing of the advertisement's imagery through heavy, very heavyweight theory was amusing. If, however, the theory-ridden exercise is read from the Sherman Tank, or perhaps from the beating-a-butterfly-with-a-baseball-bat perspective, amusement may wear thin. Given the tendency to hyperfootnoteism and dense theorizing of such deconstructive enterprises, it is difficult to gauge whether this was a critique or a parody of a deconstructive analysis. Frankly, since I like jokes, I enjoyed it as a satire of this sort of jargon-loaded field of analysis. In another recent case, Duncum (1997), cited several authorities to the effect that there is no valid difference between the aesthetic experience one can gain from art and that from mass media products. …

The Differences in Theory That Matter in the Practice of School Improvement

School improvement efforts often create controversies and conflicts that can make success difficult if not impossible to achieve. This article suggests that differences in the theories of action held by different people and organizations involved in reform efforts may be a critical source of these conflicts. An analysis of the first 2 years of the ATLAS Communities Project—a collaboration of the Coalition of Essential Schools, Education Development Center, Harvard Project Zero, and the School Development Program—shows how differences in the theories of action of these organizations contributed to significant disagreements over a number of key issues related to the process of change, the nature of the curriculum, and the shape of personal and organizational development. As a result, despite considerable funding, broad initial agreements, and good relationships at the highest levels, it was extremely difficult to make decisions and carry work out in a collaborative and efficient manner.

Book Reviews

Book reviewed in this article:Mickey Mouse History and Other Essays on American Memory By Mike WallaceArts and Business —An International Perspective on Sponsorship Edited by Rosanne MartorellaThe MUSE Book By Jessica Davis. Cambridge, MA: Project Zero, Harvard University Graduate School of Education

Drawing's Demise: U-Shaped Development in Graphic Symbolization

Comparisons between the expressive and aesthetically pleasing drawings of preschool children and the work of professional artists have been made by artists, philosophers, art educators, and researchers investigating early symbolic development (Arnheim,1969; Gardner,1973; Read,1945; Schaefer-Simmern,1948; Winner,1982). The recognition of tangible similarities has provided an illuminating perspective on the development of an early facility in graphic symbolization (Davis, 1991; 1993; Davis & Gardner, 1993; Gardner, 1973). A concurrent phenomenon has been observed: the young child's early prowess in graphic symbolization seems to decline with the onset of school, submerging or disappearing by middle childhood (ages 8-11). Apparently because of the increase in an inhibiting mandate for photographic likeness, children in middle childhood are thought to be grounded in a stage in which the free expressions of preliteral days are replaced by failed attempts at replicating physical reality or formulaic reproduction of stereotypes thereof (Gardner, 1980, 1982; Ives, Silverman, Kelly, & Gardner, 1981; Rosenblatt & Winner, 1988; Winner & Gardner, 1981). At this stage, most individuals give up entirely on their early artistic explorations. Except for artists whose artistry is often declared by adolescence (Winner, 1982), it has been suspected that there is little if any development in skills of graphic symbolization beyond the literal stage. U-shaped Development This course of development from display of early facility, to disenfranchisement in middle childhood, to mature realization only by an artistic minority, has been described as u-shaped (Davis, 1991; 1993; Davis & Gardner, 1993; Gardner & Winner, 1982). In this configuration, the highly expressive drawings of the youngest children and the adult artists are envisioned at the two high peaks of the u, with the conventionalized drawings of children in middle childhood bottoming out on the floor of the u. Indeed, it has been suggested that the cessation of development in drawing in middle childhood extends the floor of the u off to the right, transforming the configuration into an L, perhaps L for literal (Davis & Gardner, 1992). The Current Study Comparisons between child and adult art are usually made haphazardly. Champions of children's art will compare any five-year-old's drawing with, for example, any drawing by Miro or by Klee. In this study, ideational thematic constraints for the comparison were established by presenting the same drawing tasks to children at different ages, to a nonartist population, and to adult artists. Subjects were asked to draw happy, draw angry, and draw sad; the resultant drawings were compared across a number of aesthetic dimensions. Using the developed end state of the artist's work as a tool with which to measure the developing expressive efforts of children, this study focuses on the specific attributes that unite and separate the drawings of children and the drawings of artists. The research is guided by an hypothesis of u-shaped development; the course of development of the early facility is charted with consideration of what if anything is lost, and if lost, when. In order to facilitate this inquiry, it was necessary to define and operationalize a scale of criteria for assessing aesthetic dimensions across which the drawings of different populations could be informatively compared. The literature was reviewed with this objective in mind (Davis, 1989). The resultant scheme is based in large measure on early research done at Harvard's Project Zero (e.g., Carothers & Gardner, 1979; Gardner, 1973, 1979, 1980; 1982; Gardner & Winner, 1982; Winner & Gardner, 1981; Winner, Blank, Massey, & Gardner, 1983; Wolf, 1987) and on my own preliminary research (Davis,1986; 1989), all of which is informed by the work of Rudolf Arnheim (1966, 1969, 1974) and Nelson Goodman (1976, 1978). …

“On A Nutrition Mission”: A Nutrition Musical for Children

Ninety-five percent of the young clients who are referred to the community dietitian at this regional medical center exceed the 100th percentile weight-for-height. Obesity and other poor nutritional habits contribute to the six leading causes of death and disability in our state as reported by our state dietetic association. Early prevention strategies will not only save our state and our nation millions of dollars in health care costs but more importantly will improve quality of life for generations to come. With this in mind, a 40-minute live nutrition musical entitled “On a Nutrition Mission” (OANM) was created for children ages six to twelve. The idea for this unique project was developed by the community dietitian who wanted to increase nutrition awareness in school-aged children. The musical was written by a local, well-respected professor/playwright who collaborated with the community dietitian. The USDA's Food Guide Pyramid and the US Dietary Guidelines were used as the basis for the content. Entertainment was chosen as the educational medium because it is an effective teaching tool as evidenced by the popularity of shows such as “Barney and Friends” and “Sesame Street” and supported by Dr. Howard Gardener's “Project Zero” (Cogitare vol. IV, number 1, Fall 1989). OANM is entertaining, appeals to many types of learners and helps supplement textbook learning. OANM is taken to each elementary school and performed in the school's gymnasium. A professionally recorded background soundtrack is provided during the songs with actors providing the vocals. The audience is asked to participate at several points during the show to help reinforce the information provided. By the end of the show, the elementary school students have been led through basic nutrition information in an entertaining and informative way. Approximately 12,000 elementary school children will be reached when all 20 elementary schools have been visited with the live performance. To date, 2,000 children have viewed OANM. Five hundred of these students have been given both a pre- and post-test to evaluate the musical's effect on nutrition knowledge. There was a significant improvement in knowledge between the pre- and post-test (p<0.001).

Art Education for Understanding: Goodman, Arts PROPEL, and DBAE

‘What is art for?’ This provocative question was the motto of the 31st Annual Convention of the National Art Education Association (NAEA) held in Atlanta, Georgia, 1991. As a visiting scholar for a semester at Harvard Project Zero, I had rich opportunities to study art education programmes in higher education and public schools all over the United States. As a consequence, I felt complelled to reformulate the NAEA question, and ask ‘What is art education for?’This essay argues for the importance of understanding and meaning‐making in art education. It starts with a review of some common rationales for the teaching of art that stress both the alleged ability of the arts to promote ‘good’– i.e. creative, harmonious, and civilised – characters and the instrumental value of the arts as a means of communication. These rationales are then evaluated within the context of Nelson Goodman's philosophy, which emphasises the primary role of curiosity in the arts.The following two sections discuss the rationales, contributions and limitations of two art programmes that are currently being carried out in the United States: Arts PROPEL and Discipline‐Based Art Education (DBAE). Arts PROPEL has introduced long‐term, open‐ended projects that integrate production (making) with perception (learning to ‘read’ art works and observe the world closely) and reflection (thinking about one's work and the works of others). The DBAE curricula are sequentially organised and integrate content from the disciplines of art creation, art criticism (learning what to look for and how to interpret), art history (studying contexts and alternatives of taste and style), and aesthetics (building a personal philosophy of art).In the final section, Arts PROPEL and DBAE are compared. In the context of previous rationales for the teaching of art, the similarity in aims of these programmes stand out as more important than the differences in approach. Neither do these programmes overstate the humanising power of art, nor do they focus on visual literacy per se. Instead, both programmes emphasise the role of reflection, interpretation, and understanding in art. Productive and analytic art activities are used as important vehicles in making sense of the world and of ourselves. It is concluded that Arts PROPEL and DBAE offer promising and supplementary approaches to promote curiosity and to teach art for the sake of understanding.

Art, Mind, and Education: Research from Project Zero

Art, Mind, and Education: Research from Project Zero

On opening the psychology of personality to philosophy and literature in our time: A response to Gardner

In his William James Award address to Division 1 for General Psychology of the American Psychological Society in 1989, Howard Gardner has given us a thought-provoking overview of “scientific psychology,” suggesting that neuroscience, cognitive science, cultural studies, and educational and clinical psychology represent centrifugal tendencies in the discipline. At the “disciplinary core,” he suggests, lies the study of self, personality, consciousness, and artistic creation. Even if these were the “center” for James, Freud, and Murray, Gardner’s point requires the amplification that these psychologists would have sanctioned opening up psychology to other disciplines in our own time. For instance, Gardner illustrates his hope that the disciplines of literature and psychology would work together with empirical studies on “the correct interpretation of a work of art,” or the “appreciation of irony,” or the “appeal of fairy tales,” or the “power relations among individuals in Shakespearean plays,” (p. 187). In his own Harvard Project Zero, children are exposed to such interdisciplinary education and investigation. If he were to call upon the fruits of feminist philosophy and reception theory in literature, to take just two examples, he might find deeper grounds for cooperation on these fronts. Gardner’s interests would seem to require that psychology reach out to other disciplines. In all periods, psychology has had literature in its background, and literature has expressed political concerns. G. T.Fechner published sardonic humor in an effort to raise the level of scientific education in his day. R. H. Lotze belonged to an adolescent literary circle in Zittau during the 1830s that dedicated itself to what Karl Marx was doing more radically in the Rhineland: to bring social reform to the public through literature. This critical function of literature served an academic political purpose to legitimate psychology as a discipline, but it also served here to educate the public. Literary feuilletons in psychology are more common than we think. The names of Skinner, Bruner, and Bronfenbrenner come to mind from yesteryear, but more recently, Carole Wade and Carol Tavris are known through Psychology Today and their popular textbook (1990). Writers and readers of New Ideas in Psychology are primarily psychologists who do not limit their identification to psychology, as is witnessed by their fruitful contacts with education, language,