Read and React: Chapter 6

            In Chapter 6, Walker breaks down the creation of a unit plan into four main components. The first is the conceptual framework, which includes the introduction of the big idea, the key concepts about that big idea, the essential questions, and the artistic concepts. The second component of a unit is the supportive instructional activity, or more likely, activities. These are meant to explore the big idea and concepts behind it in more depth. The third component is the actual artmaking activity, which should be connected to the big idea (and yet at the same time usually must be altered to fit the students’ lives somehow). Finally, assessment is the last component, which should address the big idea, essential questions, and artistic concepts.

            Walker discusses early on that it is vitally important for teachers to have done their homework about an artist before presenting information to students. Obviously, it’s undesirable to mislead students as to artistic intents, as well as to present shallow and superficial information that is out of context. Walker cautions teachers to be prepared to encounter further student interest about an artist, and to be able to direct that interest toward the correct resources.

            Walker then discusses the framework of a unit in a highly detailed example revolving around Donald Lipski’s assemblages and the conceptual big idea of “changed meanings.”

            Overall I thought this was a pretty good chapter because it really brought all of the sometimes disparate elements of a unit together in an organized fashion, and helped the reader to understand why the organization should be this way. Sometimes I think that the organization of how teachers actually deliver information is really underemphasized. But to me, organization is a key point, because that is where connections are made and lightbulbs light up. If you cannot access prior knowledge in a students mind, then what they are able to produce is usually lacking a bit in the desired depth.

            I struggled a little bit when Walker said on page 107 to “guide students not to interpret the meaning of their sculpture as they work, and explain that artists do not usually preconceive meaning.” I would argue that many artists, in fact, do preconceive meaning and that often times that is a successful way of working. I myself naturally work in that manner, and much of Western art history worked in that manner as well. I think it’s better to explain the different working methods of artists to students, and allow them to develop that process that comes naturally to them. I think the key to emphasize is that change is not the enemy. Artworks can shift through their creation; that is a good thing. Perhaps that’s what Walker meant, anyway.

            The other concern I have about this chapter comes from the fact that Walker only mentions any technical artist skill/practice near the end of the unit framework, under the actual artmaking section. I think that building a particular set of skills for each unit is a very important component of a unit, and should not be swallowed up and hidden by only conceptual lessons. Students want to know how to execute certain skills, and through those skills as well as conceptual depth, and idea can truly be conveyed. I’d advocate including some technical artistic concepts as part of “key concepts” and consequently spending some time on a supporting activity that builds those skills as well. It’s very much the conceptual and the technical combined that makes up artistic expression.