The praxis of art's deschooled practice

John Baldacchino
{"title":"The praxis of art's deschooled practice","authors":"John Baldacchino","doi":"10.1111/J.1476-8070.2008.00580.X","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Art's relationship with education is often characterised by paradox. Yet art is often reified within an education system that refuses to see the pedagogical strengths of paradox. This article approaches art education from three positions. The first is that art is a construct that is neither natural nor necessary. The second is that there are no aesthetic or pedagogical imperatives, but that art education is the recognition of groundlessness where paradox facilitates learning. The third approach is to reposition art with regards to its relationship with learning, education and schooling. Here it is argued that art's only choice is to deschool learning. The latter is moved by an underlying dilemma as to whether art, considered as an autonomous human act, could ever engage with systems of learning without being turned into a tool or a thing. Unless art education is deschooled, the teaching and learning of art remains trapped between the assumptions of process and product. So the idea of art and education as shared practices within schooling remains somewhat dubious unless art's practices are recognised in parts perceived as wholes and where conclusions are marked by open-endedness. No possibilities for art or learning could ever emerge unless a radically different set of conditions give way to a state of affairs where knowledge is a matter to be discovered but never determined, and where a fixed ground is transformed into a wide horizon.","PeriodicalId":296132,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Art and Design Education","volume":"62 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2008-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"18","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Art and Design Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/J.1476-8070.2008.00580.X","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 18

Abstract

Art's relationship with education is often characterised by paradox. Yet art is often reified within an education system that refuses to see the pedagogical strengths of paradox. This article approaches art education from three positions. The first is that art is a construct that is neither natural nor necessary. The second is that there are no aesthetic or pedagogical imperatives, but that art education is the recognition of groundlessness where paradox facilitates learning. The third approach is to reposition art with regards to its relationship with learning, education and schooling. Here it is argued that art's only choice is to deschool learning. The latter is moved by an underlying dilemma as to whether art, considered as an autonomous human act, could ever engage with systems of learning without being turned into a tool or a thing. Unless art education is deschooled, the teaching and learning of art remains trapped between the assumptions of process and product. So the idea of art and education as shared practices within schooling remains somewhat dubious unless art's practices are recognised in parts perceived as wholes and where conclusions are marked by open-endedness. No possibilities for art or learning could ever emerge unless a radically different set of conditions give way to a state of affairs where knowledge is a matter to be discovered but never determined, and where a fixed ground is transformed into a wide horizon.
艺术非学院化实践的实践
艺术与教育的关系往往具有悖论的特点。然而,艺术往往在一个拒绝看到悖论的教学优势的教育体系中具体化。本文从三个角度探讨艺术教育。首先,艺术是一种既非自然也非必要的构造。第二,没有美学或教学上的要求,但艺术教育是对无根据的承认,悖论促进了学习。第三种方法是重新定位艺术与学习、教育和学校教育的关系。这里有人认为,艺术的唯一选择是去学校化的学习。后者受到一个潜在困境的影响,即艺术作为一种自主的人类行为,是否能够在不被变成工具或事物的情况下参与学习系统。除非艺术教育去学校化,否则艺术的教与学仍然会被困在过程和产品的假设之间。因此,艺术和教育作为学校内共同实践的想法仍然有些可疑,除非艺术实践被视为整体的部分,并且结论是开放性的。除非一组完全不同的条件让位于这样一种状态,在这种状态下,知识是有待发现的东西,但永远不会确定,在这种状态下,固定的基础变成了广阔的视野,否则艺术或学习就不会出现任何可能性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信