ALTHOUGH SOCIOCULTURAL THEORY challenges educators to embrace the social nature of learning, common practice in early childhood art has varied little from its traditional stance on natural art development, adult non-intervention, and the sacrosanct nature of creativity and artistic expression—outdated relics on hallowed ground. Despite mounting pressure to value social and cultural contexts of learning, popularised models of children's artistic development suggest that young children decline in artistic capabilities with the onset of school, primarily as a result of social interactions—a U-shaped model of artistic development (Davis, 1991; Gardner, 1982). Furthermore, children are often invisible in discussions on children's art and the value placed on their art is closely aligned with adults' aesthetics (Pariser & van den Berg, 2001) while marginalising children's actual experiences. Why beliefs about early childhood art remain entrenched may be best understood by exposing the intersection of the ever-evolving notions of childhood, art and child development.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AnningA. (2002). Conversations around young children's drawings: The impact of the beliefs of significant others at home and school. International Journal of Art and Design Education, 21(3), 197–208.
2.
AnningA., & RingK. (2004). Making sense of children's drawings. Berkshire, UK: Open University Press.
3.
ArnheimR. (1956). Art and visual perception: A psychology of the creative eye.London: Faber & Faber.
4.
BleikerC. A. (1999). The development of self through art: A case for early art education. Art Education, 52(3), 48–53.
5.
BodrovaE., & LeongD. J. (1996). Tools of the mind: The Vygotskian approach to early childhood education.Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
6.
BreslerL. (Ed.) (2007). International handbook of research in arts education. Dordrecht, NL: Springer.
7.
BrooksM. (2002). Drawing to learn. Unpublished Doctoral thesis, University of Alberta, Canada. Retrieved 27 June 2007, www.une.edu.au/Drawing/main.html.
8.
BrooksM. (2005a). Bringing a Vygotskian socio-cultural lens to young children drawing: Engaging, collaborating and communicating. Presented at the International Conference Art in Early Childhood, Froebel College, Roehampton University, UK.
9.
BrooksM. (2005b). Drawing as a unique mental development tool for young children: Interpersonal and intrapersonal dialogues. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, 6(1), 80–91.
10.
BrooksM. (2006). Drawing: The consequential progression of ideas. New Zealand Research in Early Childhood Education, 9, 51–66.
11.
DavisJ. (1991). Artistry lost: U-shaped development in graphic symbolization. Unpublished Doctoral dissertation, Harvard Graduate School of Education.
12.
DavisJ. (1997). Drawing's demise: U-shaped development in graphic symbolization. Studies in Art Education, 38(3), 132–157.
13.
DavisJ., & GardnerH. (1993). The arts and early childhood education: A cognitive developmental portrait of the young child as artist. In SpodekB. (Ed.), Handbook of research on the education of young children (pp. 191–206). New York: Macmillan.
14.
DerhamF. (1961). Art for the child under seven. Canberra: Australian Early Childhood Association.
15.
DeweyJ. (1958). Art as experience.New York: Capricorn Books.
16.
DeweyJ. (1966). Democracy and education.New York: Free Press.
17.
EisnerE. W. (1973–1974). Examining some myths in art education. Studies in Art Education, 15(3), 7–16.
18.
FleerM. (2005). Developmental fossils—unearthing the artefacts of early childhood education: The reification of ‘Child Development’. Australian Journal of Early Childhood, 30(2), 2–7.
19.
GardnerH. (1980). Artful scribbles, the significance of children's drawings.New York: Basic Books.
20.
GardnerH. (1982). Art, mind and brain: A cognitive approach to creativity. New York: Basic Books.
21.
GardnerH., & WinnerE. (1982). First intimations of artistry. In StrausS. (Ed.), U-shaped development.New York: Academic Press.
22.
GehlbachR. D. (1990). Art education: Issues in curriculum and research. Educational Researcher, 19(7), 19–25.
23.
GoodenoughF. L. (1926). Measurement of intelligence by drawings. New York: Harcourt.
24.
GraueM. E., & WalshD. J. (1998). Studying children in context: Theories, methods, and ethics.Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
25.
GunnA. C. (2000). Teachers' beliefs in relation to visual art education in early childhood centres. New Zealand Research in Early Childhood Education, 3, 153–163.
26.
HarrisD. B. (1963). Children's drawings as measures of intellectual maturity. New York: Harcourt.
27.
KelloggR. (1969). Analysing children's art.Palo Alto, CA: National Press Books.
KindlerA. M. (1996). Myths, habits, research, and policy: Four pillars of early childhood art education. Arts Education Policy Review, 97(4), 24–30.
30.
KindlerA. M. (1999). ‘From endpoints to repertoires’: A challenge to art education. Studies in Art Education, 40(4), 330–349.
31.
KindlerA. M. (2004). Researching the impossible? Models of artistic development reconsidered. In EisnerE. W. & DayM. D. (Eds.), Handbook of research and policy in art education (pp. 227–231). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
32.
KindlerA. M., & DarrasB. (1994). Artistic development in context: Emergence and development of pictorial imagery in the early childhood years. Visual Arts Research, 20(2), 1–13.
33.
KindlerA. M., & DarrasB. (1997a). Development of pictorial representation: A teleology-based model. Journal of Art and Design Education, 16(3), 217–222.
34.
KindlerA. M., & DarrasB. (1997b). Map of artistic development. In KindlerA. M. (Ed.), Child development in art (pp. 17–44). Reston, VA: National Art Education Association.
35.
KindlerA. M., & DarrasB. (1998). Culture and development of pictorial repertoires. Studies in Art Education, 39(2), 147–167.
36.
KindlerA. M., PariserD. A., van den BergA., LiuC., & DiasB. (2002). Aesthetic modernism, the first amongst equals? A look at aesthetic values systems in cross-cultural, age and visual arts educated and non-visual arts educated judging cohorts. The International Journal of Cultural Policy, 8(2), 135–152.
37.
KorzenikD. (1981). Is children's work art? Some historical views. Art Education, 34(5), 20–24.
38.
LambertB. (2005). Children's drawing and painting from a cognitive perspective: A longitudinal study. Early Years, 25(3), 249–269.
39.
LeedsJ. A. (1989). The history of attitudes towards children's art. Studies in Art Education, 30(2), 93–103.
40.
LewisT. (1998/99). Early childhood art education: A dilemma for students and teacher educators. Journal of Educational Research, 4(1), 61–68.
41.
LowenfeldV. (1947). The nature of creative activity.New York: Macmillan.
42.
LuquetG. H. (1913). Les dessins d'un enfant.Paris: Alcan.
43.
LuquetG. H. (1927). Les dessins enfantin. Paris: Alcan.
44.
McArdleF. (2001). Art in early childhood: The discourse of ‘proper’ teaching. Unpublished Doctoral thesis, Queensland University of Technology.
45.
McArdleF., & PiscitelliB. (2002). Early childhood art education: A palimpsest. Australian Art Education, 25(1), 11–15.
46.
McConnellC. (2000). Authentic creative experiences: How do we achieve them?Early Education, 22, 19–22.
47.
Ministry of Education. (1996). Te Whāriki early childhood curriculum. He Whāriki Matauranga mo nga Mokopuna o Aotearoa. Wellington: Learning Media.
48.
NAEYC & NAECS/SDE. (2002). Early learning standards: Creating the conditions for success. Joint position statement. Washington, DC: NAEYC.
49.
PariserD., & van den BergA. (2001). Teaching art versus teaching taste: What art teachers can learn from looking at cross-cultural evaluation of children's art. Poetic, 29, 331–350.
50.
PiagetJ., & InhelderB. (1956). The child's conception of space (F. J. Langdon & J. L. Lunzer, trans.). London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
51.
PiscitelliB. (2001). Foreword. In DerhamF. (Ed.), Art for the child under seven (7th edn). Canberra: Australian Early Childhood Association.
52.
ReadH. (1943). Education through art.London: Faber and Faber.
53.
RichardsR. D. (2003a). ‘I love drawing a hundred million years!’ Drawing self-efficacy and the messages kindergarten children give and receive. New Zealand Research in Early Childhood Education, 6, 65–81.
54.
RichardsR. D. (2003b). ‘Jake just does scribbles but I do good pictures.’ Drawing self-efficacy and the messages four to nine-year-old children give and receive about their drawing. Unpublished Master's thesis. Massey University, New Zealand.
55.
RichardsR. D. (2004). When they can't really read they can't really draw. Aotearoa New Zealand Association of Art Educators, 14(1), 8–9.
56.
RingK. (2003). Young children drawing at home, pre-school and school: The influence of socio-cultural context. Unpublished Doctoral thesis, University of Leeds.
57.
RobbinsJ. (2005). Contexts, collaboration, and cultural tools: A sociocultural perspective on researching children's thinking. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, 6(2), 140–149.
58.
RogoffB., & AngelilloC. (2003). Cultural variation in young children's access to work or involvement in specialised child-focused activities. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 27(3), 264–274.
59.
RogoffB., ParadiseR., ArauzR. M., Correa-ChavezM., & AngelilloC. (2003). Firsthand learning through intent participation. Annual Review of Psychology, 54, 175–203.
60.
StankiewiczM. A. (2001). Recent research in history of art education. Translations, 10(2), 1–6.
61.
ThomasG. V., & SilkA. M. J. (1990). An introduction to the psychology of children's drawings.Hertfordshire, UK: Harvester Wheatsheaf.
62.
TumanD. (1999). Gender style as form and content: An examination of gender stereotypes in the subject preference of children's drawings. Studies in Art Education, 41(1), 40–60.
VisserJ. (2006). Teachers' beliefs and practices in toddler art education: A tension between developmental and sociocultural perspectives. Unpublished Master's thesis, University of Auckland.
65.
VygotskyL. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes.Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
66.
WilsonB. (2004). Child art after modernism: Visual culture and new narratives. In EisnerE. W. & DayM. D. (Eds.), Handbook of research and policy in art education (pp. 299–328). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
67.
WinnerE. (1997). Giftedness vs creativity in the visual arts. Poetic, 24, 349–377.
68.
WolfeD., & PerryM. D. (1988). From endpoints to repertoires: Some new conclusions about drawing development. Journal of Aesthetic Education, 22(1), 17–34.
