The structure of children's responses to art and efforts in making art were examined on a random sample of New Zealand schoolchildren, ages 8-9 and 12-13. Participants completed a set of 6 performance assessment tasks in aesthetic perception and artistic production. Factor analysis and multivariate analysis of variance were used to investigate the underlying structure among the tasks, and to look at the relationships among the factors of aesthetic perception and artistic production, with age, gender, and socio-economic status. Results indicated that a 2 factor solution was robust over age and gender combinations. Also, gender, age, and socio-economic status were all related to both production and perception factors.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BaerJ. (1996). Does artistic creativity decline during elementary school?Psychological Reports, 78, 927.
2.
BeattieD. K. (2000). Creativity in art: The feasibility of assessing current conceptions in the school context. Assessment in Education, 7, 175–192.
3.
BergonziL., & SmithJ. (1996). Effects of arts education on participation in the arts. Research Division Report 36. (NEA Publication No. 0-929765-47-8). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
4.
BrewerT. M. (1995). An examination of untutored thematic and observational drawings made by third- and seventh-grade students. Visual Arts Research, 21, 57–65.
5.
BrewerT. M. (1998). The relationship of art instruction, grade-level, and gender on third-and seventh-grade student drawings. Studies in Art Education, 39, 132–146.
6.
ChulaM. (1998). Adolescents' drawings: A view of their worlds. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego, CA.
7.
ClarkR. (1998). Doors and mirrors in art education: Constructing the postmodernist classroom. Art Education, 51, 6–11.
8.
ColbertC. (2000). Gender and teaching art in the early years. BCATA Journal for Art Teachers, 40(1), 10–15.
9.
FreedmanK. (1994). Interpreting gender and visual culture in art classrooms. Studies in Art Education, 35, 157–170.
10.
FroebelF. (1912). Letters on the kindergarten.MichaelisE. & MooreH. K. (Trans.). London: Swan Sonnenschein. (Original work published 1891.)
NewtonC. (2000). What is art?: An analysis of the developmental changes in the conceptual understanding of art objects. In LocherP. & SmithL. (Eds.), Proceedings of the XVI Congress of the International Association for Empirical Aesthetics (pp. 99–100). Upper Montclair, NJ: Montclair University Press.
13.
ParsonsM. J. (1987). How we understand art. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
14.
RaphaelJ. (1996). New beginnings for new middle school students. Educational Leadership, 54, 56–59.
15.
RogersP. L. (1995). Girls like colors, boys like action? Imagery preferences and gender. Paper presented at the National Convention of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology, Anaheim, CA. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 78 956.)
16.
RostanS. M. (2005). Educational intervention and the development of young art students' talent and creativity. Journal of Creative Behavior, 39, 237–261.
17.
TumanD. M. (1999). Gender style as form and content: An examination of gender stereotypes in the subject preference of children's drawing. Studies in Art Education, 41, 40–60.
18.
ViraR. (1996). Sex! Violence! Death! Art Education for boys. In SEA News, 3(2), 5–10.
19.
VygotskyL. S. (1962). Thought and language. New York: Wiley.
20.
Weigh-JenC., & KantnerL. A. (1996). Gender differentiation and young children's drawings. Visual Arts Research, 22, 44–51.
21.
WhiteM. (1998). ‘The pink's run out!’ The place of artmaking in young children's construction of the gendered self. In YellandN. (Ed.), Gender in early childhood (pp. 223–248). New York: Routledge.
22.
WinnerE., & CooperM. (2000). Mute those claims: No evidence (yet) for a causal link between arts study and academic achievement. The Journal of Aesthetic Education, 34(3-4), 11–76.
23.
WinnerE.HetlandL.VeenemaS.SheridanK., & PalmerP. (2006). Studio thinking: How visual arts teaching can promote disciplined habits of mind. In LocherP.MartindaleC., & DorfmanL. (Eds.), New directions in aesthetics, creativity, and the arts (pp. 189–205). Amityville, NY: Baywood.
