Partnering Arts Education: A Working Model from ... - Dana Foundation

PartneringArts Education:AWorking Modelfrom ArtsConnectionTHEDANAFOUNDATION

The Dana FoundationArtsConnectionBoard of DirectorsWilliam Safire, ChairmanEdward F. Rover, PresidentEdward BleierWallace L. CookCharles A. Dana IIISteven E. Hyman, M.D.Ann McLaughlin KorologosLaSalle D. Leffall, Jr., M.D.Hildegarde E. MahoneyDonald B. MarronL. Guy Palmer, IIHerbert J. SiegelClark M. Whittemore, Jr.Partnering Arts Education:AWorking Model fromArtsConnection©2005 The Dana FoundationStephen J. Marcus, Copy EditorMartha Sparks, Assistant EditorAnn Whitman, Production ManagerBoard of DirectorsLinda LeRoy Janklow, ChairmanRobert A. Pruzan, Vice ChairmanMarshall Sonenshine, Vice ChairmanLynne S. Katzmann, TreasurerSergio J. Galvis, SecretaryTheodore S. BergerAnn Stern BerzinLynette Harrison BrubakerPatricia Morris CareyLouise HartwellJohn S. KatzmanGregory D. KennedyArthur M. KlebanoffJonathan A. KneeStacey MindichPaul T. SchnellRebecca Myers ThomasDonna A. ZaccaroHon. Kate D. Levin, ex-officioSteven Tennen, Executive DirectorJane NevinsEditor in ChiefThe Dana Foundation745 Fifth Avenue, Suite 900New York, NY 10151(212) 223-4040Please note:Partnering Arts Education: AWorking Model fromArtsConnection is available in its entirety in PDFformat on the Dana Web site: www.dana.org

PartneringArts Education:AWorking Modelfrom ArtsConnectionEDITOR:Barbara Rich, Ed.D.

About DanaThe Dana Foundation, founded in 1950, is a private philanthropicorganization with particular interests in brain science, immunology, andeducation. In 2000 the Foundation extended its longtime support of educationto fund innovative professional development programs leading to improvedteaching of the performing arts in public schools.Dana’s focus is on training for in-school arts specialists and professionalartists who teach in the schools. We support these arts education grants bydisseminating information to arts educators, artists in residence, and schoolsthrough our symposia, periodicals, and books.Our science and health grants support research in neuroscience andimmunology. Dana supports brain research through direct grants and by itsoutreach to the public, which includes books and periodicals from the DanaPress; the international Brain Awareness Week campaign; the Dana Alliancefor Brain Initiatives, a nonprofit organization of more than 200 neuroscientists,including ten Nobel laureates, committed to advancing public awareness of theprogress of brain research; and the Dana Web site, www.dana.org.

About ArtsConnectionFounded in 1979, ArtsConnection is New York City’s most comprehensivearts in education organization. ArtsConnection believes that the arts areessential to education, and intrinsic to the social, cognitive and personaldevelopment of every child. To realize this vision, ArtsConnection’s facultyof 150 teaching artists work with classroom teachers at all grade levels(pre-K–12) in creative collaborations that yield powerful arts learning experiencesfor children, teachers and families. ArtsConnection continually refines itsstrategies to meet changing educational needs, bringing depth and diversity toresidencies, performances, family, and after-school programs in music, dance,theater, and the media, literary, and visual arts.To maximize the success of its programs and build capacity for the arts ineducation, ArtsConnection provides extensive professional development for itsteaching artists and staff and for classroom teachers and arts specialists throughoutthe city’s public schools. These efforts have made ArtsConnection a fullserviceeducational partner with the New York City Department of Education,providing more than 13,000 instructional hours in 1,000 classrooms in over100 partner schools, reaching 30,000 participants annually.

Contents123IntroductionBy Steve Seidel, Ed.D. 1Toward an EducationalPhilosophyBy Carol Morgan 5Sequence Across Styles:Curriculum Articulationin Dance and TheaterBy Jessica Nicoll 9Facilitating Partnership,Building Community:Meetings in the ResidencyFrameworkBy Rachel Watts 15567Professional Development:Building a Faculty ofReflective PractitionersBy Joanna Hefferen 22A Case Study: Shall We Dance?Establishing an Inquiry-BasedPartnershipBy Barbara Watanabe Batton 27Connections:The Arts and Cognitive,Social, and PersonalDevelopmentBy Rob Horowitz, Ed.D. 32Contributors 494A Teacher’s Guide 19Acknowledgements 51A Chinese DanceResidency InspiresStudents and TeachersBy Susan Cernansky 21Index 52On the cover:Top: Students from PS 282k perform at ArtsConnection’sannual gala. (Photo courtesy of Barry Oreck)Bottom: Children display masks and self-portraits.(Photos courtesy of Richard Frank)

IntroductionBy Steve Seidel, Ed.D.When an Artist Walks Out of theClassroom, What Is Left Behind?In the opening essay of this volume, CarolMorgan, ArtsConnection’s deputydirector for education, describes a 1998event that caused her to deeply reflect, early inher tenure, on “assumptions about the role of theorganization in schools and its relationship toartists.” More specifically, Morgan asked herself,“what is left behind” after an ArtsConnectionorganizedand -supported artist’s residency hasended? This is a terrific—and, if seriously considered,terrifying—question. But, if taken just a bitmore broadly, it is a question that all of us in artseducation, indeed in any aspect of education,should be asking on a regular basis.If little or nothing is “left behind,” if there are fewlasting effects on students from interactions withan artist, art works, art materials, and whateverelse has been an element of the residency, thenwhy go to all the effort and expense of creatingthat experience? In other words, what’s the pointof doing what we do, as arts educators, inclassrooms and schools?Even in this “age of accountability” in education, Ifear that most educators still shy away from trulyasking this question, let alone engaging in asustained and rigorous inquiry in search of ananswer. Certainly, those of us who work inrelative isolation are far less likely to engage insuch an inquiry. We may be surrounded by otherteachers, administrators, and teaching artists, butwe so often may function in parallel, not incollaboration or in partnership even with thosecolleagues we see every day.The essays in this volume describe howArtsConnection, a New York City-based artseducationorganization, has made an extraordinarycommitment to seek answers to the questionCarol has posed. And ArtsConnection has goodSteve Seidel, Ed.D., is the director of both the Arts inEducation program at the Harvard Graduate Schoolof Education and Project Zero.company in that quest as it works with its variouspartners—teaching artists, teachers, and administratorsin the city schools—who share a commitmentto this inquiry.Though these essays do not comprise a traditionalnarrative, they tell a powerful story ofArtsConnection’s long-term and continuing effortto learn, grow, and change in relation to the needsof students in New York’s public schools, specifically,their needs for experiences in the arts thatthe school system cannot provide on its own. In asense, these essays reflect the lessons of the morethan 25 years of ArtsConnection’s life as anorganization. They focus, however, on morerecent insights and experiences, drawn particularlyfrom the past several years’ efforts at intensivereflection and collaborative inquiry.The value of asking “What is left behind?” is thatit serves so well not only as a beginning, but alsoas a touchstone along the way. It is an excellentprovocation for regularly “re-launching” investigationsinto the nature of learning and teaching inthe arts. Addressing that point in his book LettersTo Cristina, the late Brazilian educator Paulo Freirewrites:“It cannot be said of any question that it isthe first. Every question reveals dissatisfactionwith previous answers to previous questions.… Those who ask, however, must become oralready be committed to the process of ananswer; as much as they expect those theyask the question of to be. In other words, thequestion cannot be satisfied with waiting.” 1Committed to the Processof an AnswerIn the working model of arts education discussedin this volume, the partners—teachers, artists,school systems, and arts organizations—makecommon cause through the realization that theyneed each other to collectively do something theyall consider essential: designing and deliveringarts-learning experiences that put students indirect contact with artists and works of art, both1 1996. London: Routledge.1

to engage deeply with those art works and topractice making art. ArtsConnection and manyother arts organizations in New York and acrossthe nation have thus entered into arrangementswith local schools and school districts to try toprovide powerful and unique arts-learning experiencesto young people.Unfortunately, many of these arrangementsremain just that—arrangements—withoutgrowing into true partnerships.Knowing full well the demands and potentialrewards of true partnerships, the staff atArtsConnection have, as I see it, taken a biggamble. They are betting that the path to creatinghighly effective partnerships is most successfullytraveled when the goals of the journey are mostdemanding. Instead of merely providing artslearningexperiences for young people, they sethigh standards both for the quality and outcomesof those experiences, relentlessly asking how theycan deepen student learning. Instead of acceptingsimple indicators, they closely examine artslearningexperiences for deeper and more sophisticatedmeasures of excellence in teaching andlearning. Instead of encouraging only the artistsand teachers they work with to strive for moresignificant outcomes, they challenge themselves toprovide facilitation that makes achievement ofthose outcomes far more likely. Instead offocusing exclusively on learning goals forstudents, they also set learning goals for theirteaching artists, their collaborating classroomteachers, and, most unusually, for themselves.In the Event of the Lossof Cabin Pressure…Every time we fly in a commercial airliner, thefederal government insists that the flightattendants remind us of a counterintuitive rulethat “in the event of the loss of cabin pressure”just might save our lives and those of people welove. Before take-off they tell us that if oxygenmasks drop out of the ceiling during flight, we areto momentarily ignore the child sitting next to usand put on our own mask first. For me, at least,this always comes as a surprise. I’m quite surethat my first instinct, if I were traveling with achild, would be to reach for her mask and get itsituated on her face. This has always been myreflex as a teacher: first and foremost come mystudents, then myself.But what if, in the context of teaching andlearning in schools, we were to adapt this airlinerule by attending first and foremost to teachers’learning and then afterward to student learning?This is, in effect, what ArtsConnection staff havedone in recent years. Even as they’ve started fromand always returned to questions of studentlearning, they have steadily increased their focus,as reported in this volume, on teacher learning.Their conception of inquiry as the engine ofimprovement is built on the notion that the moreteachers approach their teaching as researchersand learners, in collaboration with others andwith plenty of support, the more they willimprove their curriculum and instruction forstudents’ benefit.The more teachersapproach their teaching asresearchers and learners,the more they will improvetheir curriculum andinstruction for students’benefit.Indeed, this is one of the relationships explored inRob Horowitz’s essay on the seven-year studyconducted by his research team on long-termpartnerships between ArtsConnection and fourNew York City public elementary schools. Amongthe researchers’ goals was to “identify and definecharacteristics of the process of partnership andinstruction that most likely influence cognitive,personal, and social areas of development.”Throughout his essay and the others in thisvolume, we learn of the many ways theArtsConnection staff has found to put teacher andteaching-artist learning up front. Jessica Nicoll’sessay describes how dance and theater artistsworking in schools in the Bronx and Brooklynengaged in intensive examination of the “what”(curriculum) and the “how” (instruction) of theirteaching by utilizing reflective analysis on theirown arts-learning experiences, Japanese lessonstudy, and Lerman’s Critical Response Protocol,among other structures, to guide their inquiry.The social dimension of teacher and teachingartistlearning, particularly the relationshipscritical for improving teaching—artists withteachers, artists with artists, artists with arts2

PHOTO BY PHIL MANSFIELD(From left) Carol Morgan, moderator, deputy director for education, ArtsConnection; Warren Simmons, executivedirector, Annenberg Institute for School Reform, Brown University; Janet Eilber, principal arts consultant, The DanaFoundation; Arnold Aprill, executive director, Chicago Arts Partnerships in Education; Jessica Nicoll, dance artist,ArtsConnection and the 92nd Street Y Harkness Dance Center; and Terry Baker, senior research scientist, EducationDevelopment Center, at “Beyond Arts Integration: Defining learning in arts education partnerships, a nationalArtsConnection symposium,” which was the genesis for this book (March, 2005).organizations, and arts organizations with schoolsor other arts organizations—is explored in JoannaHefferen’s essay. In the 40 years or so duringwhich the artist-in-residence model has been afixture of arts education in the United States,isolation has been the defining quality of theexperience. In the vast majority of cases, artistshave arrived, taught, and left, making little or nouseful contact with those who might enhancetheir experience and expertise within or acrossartistic disciplines, grade levels, or other academicdisciplines.Happily, in recent years attempts to end thisisolation have occurred in a number of ways. Forexample, writes Heffernan, “over the past decade,many New York City artists have come to regardtheir work with children not just as a ‘gig’ but assomething approaching a profession.” And thesizeable investment that ArtsConnection has madeto reduce artist isolation and build “communitiesof learners” is a theme running through thisvolume. The methods by which it has gone aboutthis essential work are varied, inventive, andinstructive for those of us intent on doing thesame in our own settings.Barbara Watanabe Batton and Rachel Wattsdescribe other aspects of these efforts, whilereminding us of the inherent challenges. Batton,whose essay focuses on Video Description as acore inquiry process for Community ElementarySchool 53 in the Bronx, cites the seeminglyextraordinary requirements of inquiry-basedapproaches to professional development.“Building a culture of inquiry among staff in aschool and within an arts-education organizationrequires time, perseverance, sustained funding,and supportive leadership. The partnershipbetween the school [CES 53], ETN [theElementary Teachers Network], andArtsConnection was five years in the making—aneternity by the standards of most schools underpressure to provide quick answers to complexproblems.”Watts’s essay points out that productive learningpartnerships between classroom teachers andartists require sustained, attentive, and sensitivefacilitation. Further, she recounts howArtsConnection took on this facilitation responsibility,practically inventing, along the way, awhole new role for arts organizations that placeartists in schools.Just as inquiry-based partnerships have emergedas critical to ArtsConnection’s work, the organizationhas also embraced the need for an “outsider”3

perspective. To that end, it has engaged inpartnership for many years with Horowitz and hisresearch team. Bringing to bear the techniques ofquantitative and qualitative research and evaluation,these educators have studied an impressivearray of relationships. In that spirit, the Horowitzessay (appropriately titled “Connections”)examines not only the role of human relationshipsbut of many other kinds, including theto students’ learning. What emerges is an image ofArtsConnection staff, classroom teachers, artists,school administrators, and researchers—acrossmyriad schools in New York City—knee-deep instudents’ work, lesson plans, videos of classroomsessions, and chart-paper diagrams. They are, asthe airline rule might suggest, attending to theirown learning first so that they can better attend tothe learning of the children they have taught thatmorning and will teach tomorrow.These educators are committed not just to askingcritical questions but to finding answers that canguide their practice. They are trying to become“smarter” as individuals, as teams in schools, asorganizations, and as a field. They embrace theirneed for partnership and collaboration to learnwhat they need to know. Aware that the effort islong and hard but also rewarding in the mostsignificant ways, they see themselves as ultimatelyenriching their students’ experiences and learning.Listen, Learn, and ChangePHOTO COURTESY OF ARTSCONNECTIONCreating masks at ArtsConnection’s Saturdays Alive, alow-cost arts program for children and their families.relationships between arts learning and literacydevelopment; teacher learning and studentlearning; and, broadly, “the arts and cognitive,social, and personal development.”In reference to his team’s longitudinal study of theconnection between teacher learning and studentlearning, for example, Horowitz writes: “Areas ofstudent development were significantly associatedwith areas of teacher growth and change, such asthe application of new skills in the classroom,increased ability to integrate the arts, greatercomfort with using the arts, buy-in and commitmentto the program, and enhanced perceptionsof students’ abilities.”Throughout this book, we see how ArtsConnectionhas responded to the challenges of attending toeducators’ learning as prerequisiteIn the 1990s, my colleagues and I published ArtsSurvive, 2 a report of our study of long-term artseducationpartnerships between arts organizationsand schools. One of our central findingswas that the healthiest partnerships were notmerely surviving but, rather, thriving. Indeed,merely surviving was an indicator of poor longtermhealth.And the key to thriving as a partnership, weconcluded, was the capacity of the partners tolisten to each other, to learn together, and to changein order to continually meet the needs of thechildren and youth in their schools.Few partnerships fully develop these capacities.Listening (truly hearing what you might not wantto hear) is hard; learning (really modifying yourunderstanding of something) is harder; andchanging (actually transforming how you functionand behave in the world) is probably the mostdifficult of all. Yet the deep work of partneringobliges participants to commit themselves to thesegoals if they wish not only to survive but tothrive. The beauty and great gift of the essays inthis book is the insights they provide for successfullytraveling the path to thriving partnerships. ■2 S. Seidel, M. Eppel and M. Martiniello. 2001. Arts Survive:A Study of Sustainability in Arts Education Partnerships. Cambridge.Project Zero, Harvard University School of Education.4

CHAPTER 1Toward an Educational PhilosophyBy Carol MorganArtists rarely do the same thing twice. Ifthey appear to repeat themselves, theyare often digging deeper into a knottyproblem. At ArtsConnection, we expect thosewho work with us in the New York City PublicSchools to bring to teaching this same kind ofcuriosity and passion that applies to their artmaking.And we especially want them to engagein inquiry, as questioning in the pursuit of clarityand understanding is at the heart of the artisticprocess.Given that ArtsConnection works in dance,theater, music, and the visual arts, and that ourgoal is to provide students with a rich diversity ofarts experiences, we do not train artists in a singleteaching methodology. We instead ask our artists,whatever their art form, to teach students theskills and knowledge they need to make theirown artistic choices while being able to recognizeand understand the choices made by others.Sometimes, however, a bit of attitude adjustmentis in order. Soon after I arrived at ArtsConnectionin 1998, I sat on a panel at a local university withan artist who had been working with our organization.After I proudly shared my educationalphilosophy and what I thought ArtsConnectionrepresented as an arts-education institution, I wasdismayed to hear the artist describe the organizationsimply as the “agent” that booked her workin the schools and then left her alone to do whatshe did best! This was her highest compliment,but it brought into question my assumptionsabout the role of the organization in schools, itsrelationship to artists, and the legacy forstudents—what they actually learn in their workwith ArtsConnection artists.The results of this particular artist’s work withstudents were almost always impressive, but hercomments made me wonder what is left behindafter an artist walks out of the classroom. Adazzling product is not enough; we must also helpCarol Morgan is the deputy director for education atArtsConnection.students to engage in their own inquiry. Studentsmust do, think, or feel something new. While thebest artists are not necessarily the best artseducators, at the very least they must gain insightsinto their students’ capacities for learning beforeentering the classroom.Providing students with opportunities for transformativeexperiences is a lot to ask of artists,especially those who may lack a comparableteaching model in their experience. But this iswhere the organization comes in:If we at ArtsConnection ask artists to bring thesame curiosity and passion—the kind of questioningin pursuit of clarity and understanding—totheir teaching that they do to their art, then weneed to model that process. If we ask them toengage in inquiry with students and teachers, weneed to model inquiry in every possible aspect ofour own work. If we ask them to partner withteachers, we too need to practice partnership.If we ask artists to be reflective practitioners whoengage in “systematic and intentional inquiry” 1about their work with students and teachers, wemust engage in similar inquiry about our ownpractices of professional development. If we askour artists to think of the organization assomething more than their booking agent, weneed to provide them with intellectual andphysical resources beyond mere logistical support.All this is a tall order for organizations that areoften strapped for time and money and yet needto meet the complex needs of public-schoolstudents. Nevertheless, ArtsConnection hasdeveloped such practices.Systems for Working with SchoolsArtsConnection works in more than 120 NewYork City public schools every year, often underchallenging conditions. Most of the buildings wereconstructed between 1900 and 1950, with fewrenovations since then, and are legendary forbeing overcrowded. Seventy percent of studentsare eligible for free lunch, and 15 percent are1 Marilyn Cochran-Smith and Susan L. Lytle. 1993.Inside/Outside: Teacher Research and Knowledge. New York:Teachers College Press, p. 7.5

PHOTO BY BRENDA KENNEALLYUsing masks to bring a character to life.designated English-language learners, thoughmany more speak a primary language other thanEnglish at home. Although the New York StateDepartment of Education mandates that 20percent of an early-elementary student’s time and10 percent of an upper-elementary student’s timeinclude the arts, in reality this goal has rarelybeen met.But we’ve come a long way. WhenArtsConnection was founded in the late 1970s,85 percent of our work consisted of auditoriumperformances and the balance was studentinstruction and professional-developmentworkshops for teachers. Today those percentageshave been reversed: more than 95 percent of ourwork is in student instruction and professionaldevelopment.Our current work falls along a continuum ofmodels [See sidebar, p. 7]. But the pièce derésistance, manifested in a handful of schools, is theongoing collaboration with school administratorsand teachers that leads to a shared understandingwe call “inquiry-based partnerships.”Inquiry-based partnerships require that certainconditions be present in a school:• A principal with a vision of what the arts, in andof themselves, bring to a child’s education andthe school community, and a commitment to dowhatever it takes to provide students withcompelling arts experiences [See Horowitz,chapter 7]• Commitments to planning, reflection, and otherprofessional-development processes that helpdeepen understanding of what and howstudents learn in the arts [See Watts, chapter 3;Horowitz, chapter 7; and “Teachers’ Guide,”chapter 4]• Time during teachers’ contracted day to meetwith artists and ArtsConnection staff in order toplan together, share expertise, and buildknowledge.Inquiry-based partnerships also require specialcommitments from the arts organization:• Monetary resources, beyond what schoolswould normally pay for a residency, to supportthe professional development of staff and artists• Experience working with schools and anunderstanding of their needs• Curiosity and the capacity to commit staff timeto engage in inquiry with teachers and schooladministrators• A stated educational philosophy that includes aclear understanding of the value of artseducation for students.Developing Capacityto Support InquiryWhile the arts-education field has traditionallystressed the professional development of teachersand artists, it has only lately begun to address the6

uilding of staff capacity in organizations likeArtsConnection. Thus as the founding generationof arts-education administrators approaches retirement,questions arise about organizational identityand practices: How do we institutionalize a visionthat may have started as the brainchild of anindividual or small group? How do we provide asolid foundation from which the work cancontinue to grow?Further, moving beyond a service-delivery modelto establish and sustain inquiry within an organization—andin partnerships with schools—requires systems and practices that enhance thestaff. Here are three practices we use that can beadapted by organizations of virtually any size andstructure:Program staff evaluations. For their yearlyevaluations, we ask staff members to respond inwriting to a series of questions that engage themin self-evaluation and goal-setting; and in thesubsequent year, we use these goals as a basis forconversation and evaluation. We also ask staff toidentify an issue or question that they willaddress throughout the coming year. Amongmany program managers, for instance, learning toeffectively facilitate meetings between artists andteachers has been a recurrent topic, leading us toaddress this issue as an organization as well[See Watts, chapter 3].Staff meetings as professional development. At oursemi-monthly program staff meetings, we try todispense with logistical concerns as quickly aspossible so that we may use most of the time forbroader discussions. Topics naturally arise, forexample, from staff’s daily interactions with theschools, and formats vary, depending on the depthof the inquiry. One such discussion led to thediscovery that we need to help facilitate collaborationwhen the artist is working with students.Teachers should be playing constructive roles inthat process, in other words, as opposed to sittingin the back of the room correcting papers.Discipline Committees. When performances werethe focus of ArtsConnection’s work, we usedoutside experts in the various art forms toevaluate artists through auditions. As our workevolved, and almost everyone on staff was eithera practicing artist or had expertise in at least oneart form, this method of evaluation no longerapplied. Thus we established in-house committeesresponsible for hiring, observing, and evaluatingall artists in their respective disciplines.Lessons LearnedEngaging in inquiry can lead to blind spots, and itis easy to develop a “group think” in whichassumptions go unchallenged—at least, internally.One the many benefits of working with artists,however, is that it helps keep us intellectuallyhonest. During one of our annual Artist Institutes,for example, some of the dancers balked at theidea of including verbal reflection in their lessons.Dance is primarily learned through the physical,they reminded us, and valued for “doing” ratherthan talking about what was done. Some dancerswondered if emphasizing verbal expression mightactually detract from the power of the physicalartistic experience. In addition, an emotionalArtsConnection’s Statementof Educational PhilosophyThe Arts Are an EssentialPart of EducationParticipating in the arts through a practice ofinquiry and discovery provides students withkinesthetic, cognitive, affective and aestheticexperience that is essential to human development.Innovation, risk-taking and creativeproblem-solving in the arts teach students newways of seeing, thinking, understanding and livingin the world. Through the arts, students learn toreflect critically, going beyond the technical skillsof simple craft to building the foundation for theirown aesthetic based on their perceptions andinterpretations of their experience.The Teaching Artist in the ClassroomTeaching artists bring unique artistic perspectivesinto the classroom to inspire, guide and mentorstudents. They can serve as professional rolemodels for students to discover their own life’swork through concentration, effort and commitment.Like the classroom teacher, teaching artistsrespect their students and meet them at theirlevels of skills, knowledge, ability and understanding.Teaching artists help students to experiencethe joy of learning in and through the arts.Teaching artists and classroom teachers workcollaboratively to develop a learning environmentthat will nurture creativity and curiosity. Theyengage in a continuous process of reflection andassessment of student work to inform theirteaching practices and enhance student learning.7

scene erupted among folk-dance artists. Were weasking teachers of traditional dance, who usepractices that have been honed over thousands ofyears, to now teach in a different way? One artistthrew up her hands in frustration and cried, “Justtell me what you want me to do!”Here was a direct challenge to our assumptionthat inquiry is always a good thing. But as artistsand staff began to problem-solve together, itbecame clear that opportunities for makingChoice-making enters into thesubtle realm of imaginationand interpretation.choices are not the same in every art form or evenin every style of dance. A creative dance andchoreography class, for example, asks students todecide sequence, spacing, timing, and movementsto create original dances. By contrast, traditionaland culturally based forms teach students dancespassed through generations, and choice-makingenters into the subtle realm of imagination andinterpretation.A breakthrough in understanding these distinctionsemerged when staff and their artistcolleagues together experienced a lesson taught byone of the master Chinese folk-dance teachers.The teacher demonstrated the contrast inmovement quality when she “rode her horse”—first while imagining nothing, and then when shevisualized the Mongolian plains surrounding her.The difference between those two performanceswas riveting. Suddenly, the question “How can weuse inquiry?” had many more answers. “What doyou see?” was all that the dancers needed toawaken them to their own artistic choices. Andwe all learned to clarify assumptions and makeexpectations explicit.Numerous other lessons have flowed as well fromsuch interactions. They include:Focus on questions, not answers. While artists areaccustomed to asking basic questions as part oftheir daily lives, many people in schools feel theycannot afford that luxury when policymakers areholding them accountable for quantifiable results.But while it is of course important to periodicallyassess what you’ve achieved, how you’ve done it,and how it has informed your organizationalpractice, focusing on questions rather than answersengages the organization in continual growth.Everyone is a learner. Inquiry is a collaborativeprocess; staff and organizational capacity, andcollective understanding, can only be builtthorough shared knowledge and understanding.In that spirit, all participants in the process mustbe heard.Replication is not a recipe. The inquiry processnever repeats itself exactly. The results even ofidentical strategies and practices will differ withgroup and context. The complex interactions ofany gathering at any given moment in fact createa messy and unpredictable learning process thatrequires gumption and commitment from allparticipants to work through the rough spots.Change takes time. Engaging in inquiry meanscommitting for the long haul to cultivate relationshipsand build understanding. It requires awillingness to construct meaning in ambiguouscircumstances while striving for clarity. Thechallenge for all of us is to allocate the necessarytime and resources to allow for such inquiry totake place.Articulating anEducational PhilosophyAs in the general field of education, “researchhas … little influence on improving classroomteaching and learning” 2 in arts education—that is,unless we consciously and persistently seek toexploit that research.Part of the task of the arts organization is to helpbridge the gap between theory and practice, and itcan fulfill that task only if it is guided by a visionof its work in the schools that goes beyond thedelivery of a service. The organization must askessential questions not only about what it does,but also how and why it does it. And it must seekto contextualize its work in a broader theoreticaland historical framework.In pursuit of these objectives, we atArtsConnection—staff, artists, and membersof our Board of Directors—have built a sharedknowledge and understanding. We haveestablished a culture of inquiry within the organizationthrough practices described in the followingchapters. We hope these accounts will informothers who are engaged in similar educationalpartnerships. ■2 James Hiebert, Ronald Gallimore, and James W. Stigler. 2002(June/July). “A Knowledge Base for the Teaching Profession:What Would It Look Like and How Can We Get One?”Educational Researcher 31(5): 3–15.8

CHAPTER 2Sequence Across Styles: CurriculumArticulation in Dance and TheaterBy Jessica NicollWalking the halls of CommunityElementary School 53 in the SouthBronx, you might come across aclassroom of fourth-graders working withmembers of an improvisational theater companyto create scenes that explore character and setting.Nearby, 22 first-grade students bring to life acollection of puppets they have created during aprofessional puppeteer’s 10-week residency. Andin a small, sunny dance studio on the secondfloor, a third-grade class—which has beenstudying the culture of China in social studies thisyear—learns a ribbon dance from members of theChinese Folk Dance Company.As the sounds and sights of art-making unfold inthis New York City public school, you maywonder if all these activities, though impressive,are just a smorgasbord of disconnected experiences.Or do they actually constitute, by design, alarger web of arts learning? And if such a webindeed exists, have the artists built it so thatstudents can develop skills that not only intersectarts styles and disciplines but also connect the artsto other subjects?In 2001, ArtsConnection began asking these andsimilar questions through a curriculum-articulationinitiative supported by a grant from the U.S.Department of Education. Eight dance and sixtheater artists who taught at CES 53 in the Bronxor at one of two Brooklyn schools participated inthe project. We closely studied artists’ work inschools and tried to identify ways to explicitly tiechildren’s learning in the arts across grades,cultural forms, and content. The goal of theprocess was to uncover and examine each artist’scurriculum, clarify learning goals and objectives,and discover essential connections and basicdifferences between artists’ approaches to danceor theater. As such, the work resulted not in asingle, replicable curriculum in dance or theater,but in a process that engaged each artist in selfreflection,careful observation of student learning,and continual inquiry.Organizations interested in pursuing an ongoingprocess of curriculum design and articulationmight consider the following questions:How do you define curriculum? How do theneeds of schools affect the curricula you offer?Will artists with different backgrounds, experience,values, artistic foci, aesthetic concerns,styles, etc., articulate a single curriculum? How dotheir differences enrich and inform the curriculumas a whole?• How do the students direct the focus of thecurriculum?• How do you demonstrate the impact onstudents of sequential study of the arts throughyearly residencies in various styles, techniques,and traditions?We began by observing the artists’ classes andthen meeting with them to understand theirperceptions of their own and others’ teachingpractice. Through these sessions we recognizedtwo factors that directed our next steps: (1) theartists, working separately from one another, werefor the most part unaware of potential links acrossgrades and styles within their art form; and (2)issues of scope and sequence reflected questionsabout child development.We then brought the artists together and involvedthem first in a four-session child-developmentseminar, 1 an experience that affected thesubsequent stages of curriculum articulation. Notsurprisingly, as the articulation process developedand artists examined their own and others’curriculum in detail, questions that first came upin the child-development seminar resurfaced andwere explored from new angles. The remainder ofthis chapter will describe that articulation process.Jessica Nicoll, a performer, choreographer, and teacher,works as an artist in public school residencies throughArtsConnection and other arts-in-education organizations.1 Workshops were led by Charlotte Doyle and Margery Franklin,faculty members of the psychology department at SarahLawrence College, and by Sarah Wilford, director of theArt of Teaching Institute at Sarah Lawrence College.9

Organizations can encourage artists to participatefully in exploring and defining curriculum. Thefollowing experiences for teaching artists can laythe groundwork:• Participating in arts classes with one anotherand analyzing the teaching process• Observing children closely in arts and non-artsexperiences• Recalling their own childhood arts experiences• Following a protocol for critical response to theart of teaching• Participating in values clarification to identify“essentials” in the teaching of an art form• Engaging in cross-disciplinary arts experiences• Participating in collaborative lesson-planningfocused on learner outcomes.Building a Foundation inDiscipline-based GroupsWhile rich discussion and learning took placewhen the theater and dance artists met together,examination of issues particular to each disciplinerequired separate sessions. A key element of thesediscipline-based meetings was participants’ reflectionson their childhood arts experiences. Whencalling up a childhood memory, several artistsdiscovered with some surprise a powerful link totheir current teaching practice. More than oneremarked, with only minor variation, “Oh! Now Isee why I do what I do.” Artists also took part invalues-clarification workshops, discussed curriculum-designliterature, 2 and reviewed artsstandards.These conversations deepened artists’ understandingsof their own and colleagues’ perspectives onteaching and the arts, but they still had notexperienced each others’ teaching. So we thenasked every artist to prepare and teach a 20-minute class that could serve as a brief but fairrepresentation of the presenter’s work. Afterleading the sample class, the artist participated ina facilitated deconstruction of the work toexamine its progression, the themes explored,their essential concepts and content, and thepedagogical methods used.2 As preparation, they studied the work of Sue Stinson (2001.“Choreographing a Life: Reflections on Curriculum Design,Consciousness, and Possibility.” The Journal of Dance Education1(1): 26-33); Frances Hawkins (1986. The Logic of Action: YoungChildren at Work. Colorado: Colorado Associated University Press);Eleanor Duckworth (1996. “The Having of Wonderful Ideas” andOther Essays on Teaching and Learning. New York: Teachers CollegePress); Dorothy Heathcote (1984. “Excellence in Teaching.” In L.Johnson and C. O'Neill (Eds.), Collected Writings on Education andDrama, Evanston: Northwestern University Press); Ben Shahn(1957. The Shape of Content. Cambridge: Harvard University Press);Steve Seidel (2001 (July). “Elements of a Quality Arts LearningExperience.” Workshop given at the Empire State PartnershipSummer Seminar at Sarah Lawrence College, Bronxville, NY);Wanda May (1995. “Teachers as Curriculum Developers.” In R.W. Neperud (Ed.), Context, Content, and Community in Art Education:Beyond Postmodernism. New York: Teachers College Press); andGrant Wiggins and Jay McTighe (2001. Understanding By Design.Upper Saddle River: Merrill Prentice Hall).PHOTO BY PHIL MANSFIELDKim Grier models choreography for dancers at PS 38k.10

THEATER ARTISTS’ GOALSCommon Goals: Early Childhood (K-2nd)Children will...• learn basic storytelling/acting skills: vocal,physical, and emotional expression• understand the basic elements of a story• integrate oral and narrative skills into the telling orretelling of a story• understand that they as the artist have a varietyof choices• experience themselves as risk-takers• develop performance skills as they move fromdramatic play to presentation/show• demonstrate an understanding of the roles of theaudience and the roles of the performer• have funOne theater artist remarked on the benefits ofgetting to know one another’s work: “We havethe opportunity to approach these kids in so manydifferent ways. We’re going to find out whatthings we need to change, augment, or take awayso that we can give them the most and they canretain as much as possible.” For the upper-gradetheater artists who taught improvisation andplaywriting, this meant recognizing ways to buildon ideas about story structure introduced by thepuppetry and creative-dramatics artists working inkindergarten through second grade. Similarly,dance artists realized that the processes studentshad explored in the early grades—development ofobservation and listening skills, for example—could be reinforced more explicitly in upper-gradeclassrooms [See table above].These sessions also revealed cross-cultural connections.After a lesson in which a Chinese danceartist explored imagery in her art form, a WestAfrican dance teacher began to examine deepermeanings in her own art form. She saw thatalthough she had told her students about thecostumes, the drums, and the geographic originsof the dances they learned, she had neverexplained their imagery—for example, that anopen-palmed gesture in one West African dancemeant the dancer was carrying no weapons.“I realized,” the artist said, “that I can help thechildren understand the ‘why’ of the dance in thesame way (that the Chinese dance artist) does.”Sometimes simply meeting with colleagues to askquestions and discuss issues led to practicalteaching tips. A theater artist working in theBronx school struggled to teach her fourth-gradeCommon Goals: Upper Elementary (3rd-5th)Children will...• develop their physical and vocal expressive skills• recognize structure in story• use that structure to create their own stories• make connections between their own storiesand others• work in collaboration as writers, actors, storytellers,audience• give feedback and incorporate feedback intoartistic work• understand the relationship of the audienceto actor/storyteller• make the transition from oral to written language• commit to an idea/choice and create an improv,story, or scenebilingual students about cause and effect. “They’redeveloping their own stories and scripts,” sheexplained, “and they don’t seem to understandthe concept of consequences. When I say,‘Because of that, this happened,’ they seem lost.”Her colleague, a Latino playwright, had a suggestion:“Try using ‘por eso.’ There’s a subtle differencebetween ‘por que’—meaning ‘because’—and ‘poreso,’ which means ‘because of that.’” The artisttook the playwright’s suggestion and reported backto the group: “That was it! They got it.”Perhaps most important in preparing for theintensive curriculum-design work ahead of us wasthe deepening sense of trust among the membersof this artistic community. A dance artist, speakingat the end of the project, noted that “we hadtaken steps that allowed us to be more comfortable,trusting, supportive, and open with oneanother.”These colleague-to-colleague interactions led toseveral discoveries that affected the continuingevolution of the curriculum-articulation process:• Artists who work alone tend to feel vulnerablein presenting their work to peers• Presenting lessons to peers can deepen a senseof trust and collegiality• Even a short (e.g., 20-minute) experience canreveal layers of content and skill building• When the artist experiences a class as a learner,this uncovers issues and questions about thepurpose and age-appropriateness of activities• Language, even among artists of the same artform and style, sometimes presents obstacles;11

we need to clarify, make meaning explicit, andnot assume understanding.Lesson StudyIn the second year, artists divided into earlychildhoodand upper-elementary subgroupswithin their discipline in response to a need thathad emerged during cross-grade discussions ofgoals for students. Artists who taught primarilyone age-level sometimes questioned the aims ofartists working with older or younger students.For example, one artist who taught improvisationaltheater to fourth-graders was baffled when astoryteller identified “fun” as a goal for kindergarteners.“That’s an outcome,” the improvisermaintained, “not a goal.” Meanwhile, othertheater artists working with younger children—first- and second-graders—recognized both theappropriateness of the storyteller’s goal and itsconnection to the improviser’s work with upperelementarystudents. By focusing on fun, thestoryteller was introducing young children to thepower and pleasure of the art form. She was alsobuilding students’ capacities for focus, listening,and task-commitment—skills that would berequired of them as future fourth-graders developingmore complex improvised and written stories.In the separate early-childhood and upperelementarysubgroups, we began to look at twoapproaches to curriculum design, both of whichemphasize what students should be able to know,do, and understand—in other words, “studentlearning.” The first method, called BackwardDesign—adapted from Grant Wiggens’ and JayMcTigue’s book Understanding by Design—isdiscussed in detail elsewhere in this volume[See Hefferen, chapter 5]. Lesson Study, thesecond method, is explained below.Lesson Study is a professional-developmentprocess used extensively in Japan that bringsteachers together to design and assess lessonscollaboratively, encouraging them to “examinetheir practice in order to become more effectiveinstructors.” 3 While Lesson Study seemed in someways ideally suited to our task of articulatingcurriculum, it was clear that our focus on thearts—a content area not addressed in the LessonStudy literature—demanded adaptation. Unlikemath teachers who might have a common lessonfor solving algebraic equations, the artists did notshare specific content. Therefore, we did not select3 Clea Fernandez and Sonal Chokshi. 2002 (October).“A Practical Guide to Translating Lesson Study For a U.S.Setting,” Phi Delta Kappan 84 (2): 128-134.LESSON STUDY: SAMPLE OF CHARTING A LESSONExamples from Afro-Caribbean dance and music 10-week residency 5th Grade, 4th session (partial sample):creating rhythmic patterns.Question for this lesson: “How do children learn to listen and observe, musically and physically, when countingphrases in music and dance?”Sequence:Key Questionsand TasksRange of StudentResponses(Predictions)Artist Reactions toResponse (Connect &Build On)Methods of Evaluation(Ideas for what and howto assess)1. Students enter dancespace, clapping easierto harder rhythms(no words by teacheror students).Q:“What do you noticeabout the spacing?”2. Leaders are chosen tolead own rhythm; otherstudents listen &respond.Q:“What makes arhythm? What doyou hear?”1. Some studentsclumping; boys separatewith buddies; moveagainst walls; largegroup moves to frontor back.2. Some leaders clear;others are unclear ortoo complex.1. Give 8 counts tore-arrange; changethe class orientation(reverse front & back).2. Ask students to thinkof pattern as conversation;ask to clap patternmore slowly andclearly so others canunderstand; may needto simplify pattern.1. Notice whether studentsbecome more focused andaware of spatial arrangementwhen re-arranged;giving students who hidein back a surprise—chance to be in front ofclass: do they have adifferent commitment?2. Do studentsdemonstrate understandingof “conversation”by timing the rhythmicback & forth correctly?Are patterns clear andprecise?12

for study a lesson that each member of the groupwould teach separately, as the process wasoriginally designed. Instead, we asked one artistto identify a question or challenge within aresidency, and engaged the group in helping toplan and evaluate the lesson that dealt with thischallenge.Our adaptation followed six steps:1. Lesson Study teams observe students in theirindividual classrooms and identify commonneeds in relation to goals for learning in the artform2. The group develops an overarching goal basedon perceived student needs [See table onp. 11 for examples]3. One artist identifies a lesson from his or herresidency that both relates to the overarchinggoal and presents a challenge to the artist4. The group collaboratively designs the lesson,using a four-column chart [See example at left]5. The artist is videotaped teaching the lesson6. The group reviews the video and offers aresponse using the Critical Response Protocoldescribed below.Once an artist had chosen a lesson, he or shedeveloped a preliminary plan for it that wouldthen be submitted to the group for revision. Theircommon medium was a four-column chart, inwhich the first column lists key questions and thesequence of the lesson. In the second column, theartist predicts how students will respond to thequestions and activities. In the third, the artistplans how he or she might react to the studentresponses predicted in the previous column. Thefinal column lists methods for evaluating students.In each of the six Lesson Studies conductedduring this project, the groups immediatelyrecognized flaws in the original lesson sequencewhen they focused on the second and thirdcolumns of the chart. A dance artist reflected:“That predicting column did it. As soon as westarted imagining how students might respond toa question, I got clearer about my own questions,the sequence, and my deeper goals.” Meanwhile,the question that initially drove the lead artist’schoice of lesson often evolved and began to findits answer through this charting process.We also adapted Lesson Study by videotapinglessons. Although the artists’ full teachingschedules in schools and studios throughout thecity made convening to watch the actual lessonvirtually impossible, videos revealed much aboutarts teaching. For example, one dance artist’sawareness of student understanding deepened asshe and her colleagues watched a video of a classshe had taught. While watching the tape sheexclaimed, “The class appears to be all aboutmaking a circle!” One of her fellow artists asked ifshe’d had a different intention. “Well,” sheanswered, “I thought it was more about learningAs soon as we startedimagining how studentsmight respond to a question,I got clearer about my ownquestions, the sequence,and my deeper goals.the dance. But now when I watch the childrendancing, my question is: ‘How can I help themmake the transition from following to leading?’”The group began to brainstorm a new sequencefor her lesson that might build a stronger basisfor children to understand and make that criticaltransition.Another video led to a similar recognition ofstudent understanding by a theater artist. Sheintroduced the taped lesson by saying that “thesestudents just can’t seem to collaborate.” Afterwatching the tape, the group commented that thefirst 10 minutes of the class—an improvisationalwarm-up—was in fact an extraordinarydemonstration of student collaboration. “Butyou saw what happened when they went totheir tables with their writing from the previoussession. It all fell apart.” A colleague offered: “Can we find something in the warm-up that canbuild a better transition and use the collaborativeskills they are demonstrating?”Finally, we adapted Lesson Study by using anarts-based procedure—choreographer LizLerman’s Critical Response Protocol 4 —to offerfeedback on individuals’ teaching. Lerman’sprotocol, which reinforced our view that teachingis an artistic endeavor, rests on the conviction thatartists must determine the intention of their ownwork. By asking questions about their teachingprocesses, artists participating in our sessions4 Liz Lerman. 1993 (Winter). “Toward a Process for CriticalResponse,” High Performance 16 (4):46-49.13

explored their teaching, developed motivation fortheir own and their students’ learning, andbecame open both to giving and receiving criticalresponses. In addition, this procedure offered a safeand comfortable way to give and receive feedbackwithout becoming defensive or disengaged.The protocol has four steps:1. Responders affirm the artist’s work2. The artist asks responders questions about thework3. Responders ask the artist questions4. If the artist wishes, responders share theirimpressions of the work.Building Connections Across GradesAt the conclusion of the curriculum-articulationprocess, we reunited the discipline-based groupsacross all grades, K-5. The artists reviewed theiroriginal project outlines and reflected on theirexperiences with Backward Design and LessonStudy. “Things are moving around,” one danceartist said. “I’m discovering a better order. I’m alsorealizing that my curriculum isn’t carved in stone.”After refining the project outlines, each artist gavea brief presentation to the group, highlighting theessentials in their curriculum. They prioritizedand charted goals, which were posted, in gradeorder, across a wall [See table, p. 11]. StudyingPHOTO BY BRENDA KENNEALLYPracticing to make it a perfect dance performance at PS 364m.Initially, several artists—master teaching artists inparticular—resisted in-depth inquiry, but theygenerally came around after participating in thecurriculum-articulation process. One such artist,for example, began to notice students strugglingwith a transition in her class. A question aboutbeginnings, endings, and transitions emerged.One of her colleagues later commented: “Becauseshe found such a clear question, we could reallyexplore it and respond when we watched thevideo of her class. Now I’m asking myself aboutbeginnings, endings, and transitions.” Beyonddetermining the flow of a class, the questionsencompass big ideas that apply to the content ofany art form.Throughout the Lesson Study process, artistsrefined their curricula after watching students inaction, noting where they struggled, and contemplatinghow their struggles reflected levels ofunderstanding. One artist later observed, “I feellike I’m cutting out all the unnecessary stuff. NowI know what really matters.”the grades preceding and following theirs, theartists identified connections across levels andspelled out the elements that they would like tomake more explicit in their work.This collaboration among small groups of artistshas reached beyond the three years of thisproject. In new partnerships with differentchildren, teachers, and colleagues, these artistshave continued to stretch themselves andtheir work.The curriculum-articulation process has alsochanged the ArtsConnection organization as itsprogram managers have adapted aspects of it intheir own work with school personnel and artists.For example, Lesson Study is now used byArtsConnection staff as a collaborative way toplan, implement, reflect on, and revise workshopsand meetings they facilitiate with artists andteachers who come together to enrich children’slearning in schools. ■14

CHAPTER 3Facilitating Partnership,Building Community:Meetings in the Residency FrameworkBy Rachel WattsWHEN MANNY ARRIVED IN MY KINDERGARTEN CLASS,he did not speak in complete sentences. He wouldpoint to things he wanted or shake his head tocommunicate. By the time he was in my third-gradeclass, he had come a long way but still had delays.When ArtsConnection storytelling-artist Ron Sopylafirst met with the class, Manny chose a spot on therug far from the storyteller’s chair. He proppedhimself against the wall as if he wanted to disappearinto it. After all, storytelling required speaking.Manny’s fear showed. As the residency went on,however, something miraculous happened. With eachsession, Manny inched slowly toward the storyteller’schair and mouthed the words of the story.At the end of the residency, Ron asked for volunteersto retell one of the stories he had taught the class.Manny volunteered. He sat tall and smiling in thestoryteller’s chair. Each word that left his lips wasdelivered with confidence. When he finished, the classcheered him and he beamed with delight. He hadaccomplished something that was virtually impossiblejust a year before—communicating effectively withpoise in front of a large group.The experience changed Manny. He became moreself-assured in his manipulation of the spoken word.This new love for the spoken word translated into adeveloping thirst for good stories. In reading andwriting workshops, Manny started to read moreindependently and his writing contained more detailand a wider range of ideas. Manny was becoming aliterate person right in front of my eyes.Ron’s presence and his gift for storytelling allowedthis development in Manny that I had been unableto spark. Through the arts, Manny improved hisreceptive and expressive language skills, andsubsequently enhanced his literacy development.—Tashon McKeithan, third-grade teacherRachel Watts is currently the director of the MarinYouth Center in San Rafael California. She previouslyworked at ArtsConnection as a program manager andresearch associate.Classroom-teacher Tashon McKeithan andteaching-artist Ron Sopyla formed apartnership that allowed Manny to gainnew skills and confidence. Yet many relationshipsbetween teacher and artist never approach thiskind of success. Teachers have an understandingof the social, developmental, and educationalissues that challenge their students, while artistslike Ron typically have vast expertise in their artform, acquired through years of experience. Butartists’ language can seem foreign to teachers, andteachers’ language can seem unintelligible toartists. Without effective communication betweenteacher and artist, a partnership like Tashon’s andRon’s is far from guaranteed.When this partnership is successful, teacher andartist both comment on feeling respected asprofessionals. And, most important, studentlearning benefits. But to initiate such collaboration,arts organizations must do more than simplyput artists and teachers in the same room andhope that a meaningful relationship will magicallydevelop.ArtsConnection has found that sending programstaff into schools to facilitate encounters betweenteachers and artists increases the likelihood thatthey will connect in meaningful ways. Through aseries of planning meetings and reflectionmeetings that span a residency, the facilitatorhelps teachers understand the artists’ processesand goals for the residency. Similarly, he or shehelps artists understand teacher language,curriculum requirements, and pedagogy.Facilitators have played a role in allowing for aclear, unobstructed flow of communicationbetween teacher and artist. For example, in onemeeting teachers talked about “scaffolding alesson” and the artist mentioned “intentionality indance,” each assuming that the other knew whatthese phrases meant. 1 The facilitator translated,1 Scaffolding is defined by Jerome Bruner as “a process of‘setting up’ the situation to make the child’s entry easy andsuccessful and then gradually pulling back and handing therole to the child as he becomes skilled enough to manage it.”(1983. Child's Talk. New York: Norton). Intentionality in dancerefers to movement with a clear physical, emotional, anddramatic intention; intentionality is necessary to create dance.15

EFFECTIVE FACILITATIONA facilitator can use the following strategies to preparefor and conduct planning meetings that systematicallyaddress student learning in the arts.Before a Planning Meeting• Touch base with the artist, teachers, and a contact atthe school• Communicate logistical information• Identify conditions unique to each meeting that mayaffect facilitation• Identify facilitation goals based on those conditions.• Plan a reflective moment (art activity, reflection on aword or recollection)During a Planning Meeting• Establish residency and meeting context• Make affirmations and eye contact, remember names• Encourage participation• Help the group establish ground rules, such asmeeting structure and participant roles• Help the group share goals for the residency• Ask participants to share some of their prior artsexperiences• Summarize and restate key concepts in order toensure understanding by all participants• Take notes• Provide closure: review what has been said and helpparticipants explore possible next stepsBetween Planning Meetings• Observe workshops• Seek feedback from the artist, teachers, and perhapsan administrative contact at the schooldefining the terms to help group members betterunderstand each.Not all organizations and programs are set up toadd facilitation to their efforts. Before implementingfacilitators, organizations might explore thefollowing questions:• What goals and expectations do we have forour work?• What conditions affect the work that we do?• Have we experienced a successful partnershipin our work before? Why was it successful?What were the participants doing?• How can a facilitator help raise such a partnershipto a new level?• What opportunities do we have for people totalk to each other about their work?• Address any concerns or issues• Type up notes from the previous planning meetingand possibly share them with participants in the nextplanning meeting• Identify key themes from notes for use in thereflection meetingDuring a Reflection Meeting• Ask the group for possible agenda items• Share possible themes from planning meetings,workshops, and feedback given between meetings• Remind the group to stay focused on studentlearning in the art form• Use the artist as a resource for aiding conversationabout the art form• Explore goals: Are they being addressed? If not, howshould they be? Should goals be refined?• Connect comments with original goals• Ask one question at a time• Consider when to lead and when to hold back(and when to let go)• Identify differences in perspectives so that they maybe explored more fully• Identify clarifying or probing questions• Ask a question and then allow time for participants toexplore the answer. Do not immediately fill a silencewith your own answer or a rewording of the question• Turn comments into neutral questions• Provide closure to the meetingAfter a Reflection Meeting• Write up the notes and share them with all parties• Identify themes for the next meeting• Are there staff people, teachers, parents, artists,or consultants who are especially good atbuilding working relationships among people?What can we learn from them? How can weuse their skills to help us in our work?By codifying the elements of facilitation and thestrategies that correspond to them, we hope tohelp novice facilitators avoid a common pitfallillustrated by my own experience when I firststarted facilitating. Because I worried about notknowing enough about art or education to lead adiscussion on student learning in the arts, Ientered meetings with a list of preset questions.The result was that sessions focused almostentirely on logistical issues rather than oncurriculum content and student learning. We thusencourage facilitators to keep a more open16

ELEMENTS OF FACILITATIONOver the course of a residency, discussion in planning and reflection meetings often initially focuses on logistics,and then shifts to centering on student learning in the arts and sometimes even to the aesthetic qualities of anart form itself.We have identified four elements of facilitation, specified in the table below, to encourage such a shift: 2Facilitating LogisticsDefinition: Establish a context forthe work. Provide informationabout the artist and the program.Share meeting and workshopschedules.Facilitating LearningDefinition: Build awareness ofstudent learning in an art formand of its connections withlearning and development in otherdisciplines.Facilitating ReflectionDefinition: Encourage teachersand artists to rethink theirteaching practices and explore theextension of the arts into theclassroom.Facilitating Aesthetic UnderstandingDefinition: Connect descriptiveobservations of students with thenature and language of the artform. Develop literacy in the artform by articulating its practiceand pedagogy.Facilitator’s Goals: Help participantsunderstand the residencyprocess and provide a venue forcommunication between teacherand artist.Facilitator’s Goals: Help participantslearn from each other as agroup. Help the group definewhat and how students arelearning in the arts residency.Facilitator’s Goals: Help participantsidentify a line of inquirythat is informed by student workin the art form and related toteaching practice.Facilitator’s Goals: Help participantsidentify skills, strategies,and knowledge in their artsexperiences. Help them tounderstand key terms andconcepts of the art form and theirrelationship to student learningand development.Facilitator’s Actions: Take thelead, negotiate logistics, andensure that all participantsunderstand the context of theprogram.Facilitator’s Actions: Ask clarifyingquestions to help participantsdescribe student learning andunderstand the language of eachother’s professions.Facilitator’s Actions: Try toconnect all comments to specificexamples from the residency. Turncomments into questions that mayinform teaching practice.Facilitator’s Actions: Ask participantsto share students’ surprisingobservations. Help participantsfind words to describe theaesthetic elements of the art form.agenda and to deliberately address the moreadvanced levels of facilitation whenever possible.Here are several sample questions a facilitator canask to encourage teachers and artists to explorestudent learning and aesthetic development:• What have you noticed so far about yourstudents in the workshops?• Have you observed students using tools orstrategies from the residency in the classroom?• How are the workshops addressing the themeswe identified in our previous meeting?Professional Developmentfor FacilitatorsSince the inception of facilitated meetings,ArtsConnection has helped program staffmembers complement their experiences atschool meetings. We do this through professionaldevelopment sessions that give them the2 We first encountered the concept of facilitating logistics andlearning in Steve Seidel’s work, 24 Hours: An evidence process forimproving teaching and learning available at Project Zero’s Website, http://pzweb.Harvard.edu/Research/Evidence.htm. Thoughthe definitions are different, Seidel’s work helped us identify away to classify facilitation.17

opportunity to share their expertise with eachother and to hone their facilitation skills.Moreover, we ask artists and teachers to do thesame. By acknowledging each other’s expertiseas practitioners, we engender the kind of trustand collegiality that allow us to examine ourpractice as arts administrators.In order to train facilitators, we have adaptedseveral protocols used with teachers and artists,such as:• Reflection on a key word• Video description process [See Batton, chapter 6]• Reflection study, adapted from lesson study[See Nicoll, chapter 2]Creating a staff of effective facilitators requirestime and financial commitments from the artsorganization. But the rewards of a successfulcollaboration between a teacher and an artist—children’s learning in the arts—repay the initialinvestment many times over. As TashonMcKeithan writes of her student, “I am unsurewhether Manny would have made as muchprogress without the arts-residency experience.For Manny, there was something thrilling andalluring about the arts that provided the connectionto literacy that he desperately needed.” ■Resources:David Allen and Tina Blythe. 2004. The Facilitator’s Book ofQuestions: Tools for Looking Together at Student and Teacher Work.New York: Teachers College Press and the National StaffDevelopment Council.Kevin McCarthy, Elizabeth Ondaatje, Laura Zakaras, and ArthurBrooks. 2004. Gifts of the Muse: Reframing the Debate about theBenefits of the Arts. Santa Monica: Rand Corporation.PHOTO BY BRENDA KENNEALLYLarry Grimm coaches a student in a drama workshop at PS 276k.18

CHAPTER 4A Teacher’s Guide“Artists have different tools than I do. They usedifferent language and techniques to get informationacross. And they can sometimes communicate withkids in ways that I haven’t been able to.”— A classroom teacherInviting strangers into your classroommay require a leap of faith. But as theabove teacher discovered, partneringwith a professional artist can offer opportunitiesfor you and your students to learn in new ways.Remember that when a stranger enters theclassroom, your students will take their cues fromyou. If you collaborate with the artist, yourstudents will be both more likely to take thatperson’s mission seriously and to collaborate witheach other. Conversely, if you treat the artist’spresence in the classroom as an opportunity to doother work, students will get the message thattheir time with the artist isn’t really important.To help you make an arts residency productive forall involved, here are some tips from teacherswho have successfully collaborated with artists:For Teachers1. Planning with the artist• Art may not be your content area, but you bringpedagogical expertise to the table, as well as anunderstanding of your students. Don’t be afraidto share that knowledge.• Where can you go to learn more about theculture or the art form the artist is teaching?Ask the artist or arts organization for additionalresources.• Talk to the artist about what’s going on in yourclassroom. Is there a theme that you and yourstudents are working on that the artist canenhance?• Determine with the artist what is expected ofyou when he or she is teaching, and identifyroles as clearly as possible before the artist comesContributors to this Guide are: Susan Cernansky, PS 53;Tashon McKeithan, PS 53; Eve Ottavino PS 39;Paula Pinnock, PS 130; and Debra Scharf, PS 38.into your classroom. Consider: Who will be incharge? Who decides student’s behavioralboundaries—what is acceptable in an art class,and what is not? Tell the artist the ways in whichyou respond to your students when theirbehavior is unacceptable.• Discuss the teacher’s responsibilities betweenartist visits. Will students be expected to dohomework or to practice, and are these expectationsrealistic? Don’t be afraid to set limits onwhat you can and cannot do. Asking you tohave kids listen to music, for example, inbetween artist’s sessions is quite different fromasking you to have the kids write music.• Discuss the logistics of the arts lesson. Forexample, if the art activity will be messy, whowill be responsible for cleaning up?• Think about how the artist’s visit will affect thekids’ day—and your day. Are you willing tostretch—to do whatever it takes—to make thisopportunity available to them?2. Preparing students for the arts experience• Tell your students that the artist will be comingand that they’ll be learning something new.• Share your expectations with your students,and note that while they’ll be having fun, thiswill not be recess.• Reflect on your own educational goals for yourstudents and how the arts experience can helpyou to achieve them.3. While the artist is in your classroom• Think about how you can help studentsincorporate prior learning into the arts experience.What skills do your students need todevelop? What are your educational goals foryour students, and how can the arts experiencehelp you to achieve them? How can you helpyour students have a richer arts experience?4. Between sessions with the artist• Incorporate terminology or practices introducedby the artist so that there is continuity to thearts experience. For instance, playing the music19

that he or she used can help students recall thatexperience and keep it alive. Also, note thatmost performing artists use techniques to helpstudents “warm up,” “cool down,” or “focus,”which many teachers find useful during the restof the school day.• Insist on an ongoing dialogue with the artist toassess what worked, what didn’t, and the goalsto be addressed in future sessions. What is thenext step for individual students to help themget more out of the arts experience? How mightyou work with the artist to encourage suchhigher achievement?5. How can classroom work be intertwinedwith the arts experience?• Think about an arts experience you had as achild. Describe it. Where was it? Who wasthere? How old were you? What did you do?What made it memorable? Find the value ofyour experience and build from there.• Students are often more willing to take risks inarts classes or to reveal a talent that may notshine in traditional academic settings. How canyou help students extend their successes fromthe arts experience into other subject areas?• Using a format such as that presented inWiggins and McTighe’s Understanding by Design,think about what you want your students toknow or understand at the end of their workwith the artist. 1 How can the arts experiencebecome part of a larger inquiry? Design afocusing question for each lesson. Determineyour own open-ended questions based on theart experience.• Document your work with students and theirwork with the artist so that you may extend thelearning and share it with the schoolcommunity. Find ways of sharing not only theproducts of the residency but the process—whatand how the children learned with the artist.For Administrators• Provide a dedicated space that the artist may useso that there is no scramble at the last minute.• Be sure to schedule artist sessions around suchconstraints as tests, field trips, and holidays.• Allow time for artists and teachers to preparetogether.• Make a commitment to the program, andconvey your belief in its importance to theschool community. Also, provide specifics:communicate to your teachers and parents whatwill happen, how long the artist will be in yourschool, a bit about the artist’s qualifications, andhow this experience will provide anotherlearning opportunity for the students.• Expand the arts experience to the whole schoolcommunity. For example, plan family events inthe evenings.• Be realistic about what it is possible to achievein the allotted amount of time. Focus on thelearning process, not necessarily the product.• Build the arts into the culture of yourschool. Tell new staff members that this schoolvalues the arts and its partnerships with artsorganizations.For Artists• Because every classroom has its own personality,get to know your audience. If possible,observe a few classroom lessons before youbegin working with the students.• Because teachers might feel that they didn’tparticipate in the decision to bring you intotheir classroom, they may resist your efforts. Sosearch for common ground: all teachers wanttheir students to have fun and to experiencesuccess. Find a way to tap into the teachers’values. Engage them in dialogue, ask meaningfulquestions, and listen to their answers.• Communicate to teachers that you are there tosupport them and their students. Ask, forexample, if there are any themes they’reworking on that you can help to enhance oreven take in new directions.• Be prepared to talk about the benefits of the artsexperience for students in terms that holdmeaning for teachers. What are the social,personal, and cognitive skills that students—andperhaps teachers—will learn from working withyou? Talk about such artistic goals in teacherfriendlylanguage.• Even with your best efforts beforehand, youshould still expect skepticism from teachers,especially at the beginning. Given that teachershave a lot on their plates, they may not make a1 2001. Upper Saddle River: Merrill Prentice Hall.20

100-percent commitment until they see howyour work actually helps them to achieve theireducational goals for their students.• Be flexible. There are many occurrences duringa school day that can interfere with even thebest-laid plans.• Bring the same passion and curiosity to workingwith students as you do to your artwork. Kidsneed encouragement to take risks, so youshould try to build a safe environment thathelps them expand their imaginations. ■A Chinese Dance Residency Inspires Students and TeachersBy Susan CernanskyI AM AN EDUCATOR WHO BELIEVES THAT ENGAGINGchildren, especially those in the early grades, inactivities connected to the concept they arelearning will help them more deeply understandit. And because I also believe that everyone entersinto learning differently, when I was a classroomteacher I planned units of study that integratedvisual, auditory, and kinesthetic components.In one unit, we took a trip to the planetarium asa jumpstart to researching different aspects of thesolar system. After we finished our research andour models of the solar system, we pretended toblast off into space. When we saw a particularplanet, star, or black hole while on this imaginarytrip, we would periodically freeze time longenough for each student to share his or herresearch findings (as depicted in the series TheMagic Schoolbus). 1I became a third-grade instructional leader andthus no longer taught in a single classroom, but Istill held onto my belief that activities related toeach lesson deepen learning. So when the thirdgrade began a Chinese dance residency, I tried tocreate ways to deepen the children’s learningfrom this experience.Given that the third-grade social studies curriculumalready included the study of communitiesaround the world, wouldn’t it be an incredibleopportunity, I thought, if the experience ofChinese dance could stimulate the student’slearning about numerous other things regardingChina? Remembering our trip to outer space, Iproposed to the teachers that we study China bypretending to travel there, and that the childrenkeep a travel journal to report what they learned.The teachers welcomed this idea.I read Marissa Moss’s Amelia Hits the Road 2 to thechildren so that they’d see what one could writein a travel journal. Then we prepared for the trip1 Joanna Cole and Bruce Degen. New York: Scholastic Press.2 1997. Middleton: Pleasant Company Publications.Susan Cernansky is a UFT Teacher Center staff/literacycoach at PS 36 in the Bronx.by studying such things as China’s location, itsclimate, how we would get there, and what itemswere needed—such as a passport and an English-Chinese dictionary—for this international travel.We also interviewed a teacher who had been toBeijing, which gave us some facts about thecountry as well as first-person details about theairplane trip.We proceeded to write about our journey. Eachday we made an entry, with the first being aboutpacking all the things we needed. Next, wepretended to board an airline flight, take off, andfill our time in flight with activities such as eatingand watching a movie. When we arrived, weretrieved our luggage, stood in line to get ourpassports stamped, and proceeded to the hotel. Allthese experiences were of course duly noted inthe journal.Each time we met, we learned about anotheraspect of China by pretending to be on a tour; ourimaginations were driven by videos, books, andother materials, which I got from public libraries,bookstores, and travel agencies. Each sessionended, as always, by writing about the makebelieveexperience in the journal.One day we pretended to visit a Chinese school tosee how different it was from our own. Anotherday we enjoyed a Chinese dance performance inBeijing.In these and other imaginary outings, thechildren could describe from their “first-handexperiences” what they had seen—and, remarkably,they were able to use so much voice in theirwriting. We even took an actual trip to our city’sChinatown to see the people and the architectureand, naturally, to taste the food. Here too, ofcourse, the children wrote about their (real)experience.Through all of this, the children learned factsabout China in a way that was meaningful. Theteachers saw that. They also saw how well thechildren were writing and, most of all, the smileson their faces. It was a trip that none of us willever forget.21

CHAPTER 5Professional Development: Building aFaculty of Reflective PractitionersBy Joanna HefferenOver the past decade, many New York Cityartists have come to regard their workwith children not just as a “gig,” but assomething approaching a profession. At the sametime, arts organizations have recognized thatproviding quality arts learning for students andteachers alike requires more than a pool ofindependent contractors. It calls for building afaculty—a challenge that can only be met if artsorganizations rethink the professional developmentof teaching artists.The goal of ArtsConnection’s professional developmentprogram is to build a faculty whosemembers can:• Articulate what they want children to learn inthe arts• Design and implement age-appropriate artscurricula that expand learners’ understanding,skills, and personal aesthetics in an art form• Reflect on their own and colleagues’ teachingpractice• Develop strategies for constructive partnershipswith teachers.How does an arts organization achieve thesegoals? At ArtsConnection, we view artists’ professionaldevelopment through a framework ofrelationship building [See diagram, p. 23], at thecenter of which is student learning. The studentartistrelationship continually informs instruction,and thus professional development. But a series ofother relationships—artist-teacher, artist-artist,artist-organization, and organization-organization—areneeded to complement that corepartnership between student and artist.Artist-to-Teacher:A Deepening PartnershipBecause the artist-teacher relationship supportsstudent learning and shapes instruction,Joanna Hefferen is the director of professionaldevelopment at ArtsConnectionArtsConnection has developed and adapted threeprocesses to deepen that relationship. They aredescribed in other chapters of this volume underthe headings of Planning and Reflection Meetings[See Watts, chapter 3], Video Description Process[See Batton, chapter 6], and Lesson Study [SeeNicoll, chapter 2]. These inquiry-based processeshelp artist and teacher develop mutual trust, ashared vocabulary, and a greater understanding ofhow the arts support and deepen student learning.Artist-to-Artist: SupportingCollegial RelationshipsThe richest professional development for me iswhen I take a workshop from another artist. I’mengaged, and I come away stimulated with ideas Iwant to try in my own residency. That’s what Iwant in professional development: more sharingof what we each do with kids.—ArtsConnection theater teaching artistMost teaching artists have honed their practice inisolation, with few opportunities to describe whatthey do and how they do it. ArtsConnection hasbrought in the concepts of the Artist Institute, theShare and Deconstruction Process, BackwardDesign, study groups, and mentoring as supportiveenvironments in which artists may observeeach other’s teaching, reflect on that work, andformulate questions about their own practice.Artist Institute. All teaching artists and programstaff participate in this three-day pedagogicalsymposium to examine teaching practice throughinquiry, with two follow-up days scheduled laterin the school year to reinforce that year’s topic.Past inquiries have included “How may I helpstudents become more aware of what they arelearning in the arts?”, “How can we scaffoldstudent learning and design effective transitions inour lessons?”, and “What is a quality arts-learningexperience?”Sharing and Deconstruction Process. After anartist prepares and teaches a 20-minute sampleclassroom lesson to a group of teaching artistsfrom different disciplines, the group and a facilitatorthen outline the sequence of the lesson,22

discuss what was learned, identify the transitionsin the lesson where they experienced challenges,and analyze how the transitions supported thedesired student-learning outcomes.Participating artists then restructure lessons fromtheir own project outlines, with support from acolleague. Working in pairs, they select a lesson,sketch out its sequence, identify the transitions,and describe how each transition addresses thelesson’s stated goal and objectives.Professional DevelopmentOrganization—OrganizationArtist—OrganizationArtist—ArtistArtist—TeacherStudentEducationalPhilosophyArtistPartnershipCollegialityRespectAlliancesBuilding a FacultyBy participating in the sharing and deconstructionprocess, artists:• Develop lesson-planning skills• Learn to describe what they do and how they do it• Deepen their understanding of each others’ work• Become a faculty of inside experts and masterteaching artists• Identify areas for further professionaldevelopment.Backward Design. This is a curriculum-developmentmethod, based on Grant Wiggins’ and JayMcTighe’s book Understanding by Design, 1 that1 2001. Upper Saddle River: Merrill Prentice Hall.helps artists uncover the essential concepts andprocesses in their art form and supports them inplanning a residency. The process essentially asksartists to identify what they want students toknow and be able to do as a result of participatingin the residency, rather than to begin the planningprocess with a favorite lesson or activity. With afocus on student outcomes, artists identify the artsactivities related to those outcomes, develop anintegrated assessment plan, and finally structurethe lesson sequence of their residency.While backward design takes time, artists acrossdisciplines agree that the process clarified theirteaching goals and gave them new ideas aboutplanning a residency. One experienced teachingartist, who had previously resisted formalplanning methods because she feared they threatenedher responsiveness to students, noted thatbackward design “clears away all the clutter.” Infact, she applied it to her own art making.Similarly, an ArtsConnection dance teaching artistsaid that the process “gets to the specifics of whatI want my audience to understand about my pieceand then what the dancers have to know and doto crystallize that understanding. It’s all aboutclear communication, whether it’s in a classroomor on a stage.”Backward design helps artists to:• Identify observable learning outcomes• Deepen their understanding of their ownartistic processes• Structure learning activities more effectively• Increase awareness of assessment methods• Implement change in their practice.Study groups. Small groups of teaching artistsexplore questions about their practices through aseries of peer observations and discussions. Artistsreport that participation in these inquiry groupsstimulates new ideas, clarifies teaching goals,develops a shared vocabulary, and helps build acollegial network that continues after the grouphas officially disbanded.Mentoring. We recently piloted a program inwhich a less-experienced teaching artist and amentor teaching artist in the same disciplineobserve each other’s work and debrief together.The mentor supports his or her newer colleagueby helping to design a project outline, providingfeedback and strategies for improving practice,and giving ArtsConnection staff a fuller picture of23

Professional Development:Relational FrameworkWorksheetBuilding Upon Your Strengths• Select the ring of relationship that is the mosthighly developed at your organization [Seediagram, p. 23]• List the structures that support that relationship• Why are they effective structures?Addressing Your Challenges• What are your professional development goalsfor your organization?• What relationship(s) need to be developed tosupport these goals?• What are the challenges?• What do you have in place that supports thisrelationship?• How could you build on this?• What structure could you develop to supportthis relationship?that colleague’s professional-development needs.Providing the resources to support this componentis a challenge, however; master teaching artistsneed to be fairly compensated for their efforts andthe organization must provide adequate staff timefor overseeing the program.The mentoring process:• Strengthens the less-experienced artist’s skillsthrough observation and reflection• Fosters collegiality, strengthening that artist’sidentification with the organization• Builds a cadre of master teaching artists who canassess and develop the teaching practice of otherartists in their discipline.Artist-to-Organization: StrengtheningRelationships through Respect2 Maxine Greene. 2004 (December 11). Comments in a panelpresentation, “Speaking into the Void: Artists and EducatorsEnvisioning School Reform Together,” at the EmergingScholarship in Urban Education conference convened by thePh.D. Program in Urban Education, City College of New York.Recognizing that relationships exist betweenindividuals, not institutions, philosopher andeducator Maxine Greene advises us to recognizethe importance of “person-to-person partnerships.”2 An artist’s identification with an organizationis only as strong as his or her relationshipswith specific staff members of that organization.Further, artists should feel they are able to providea quality arts experience because of an organization,not in spite of it. ArtsConnection’s programstaff nurtures relationships with artists byproviding support, modeling reflective practice,and assessing artists’ teaching.Providing support. One of the ways in whichArtsConnection shows its commitment to artists isby assigning, to every school, a program managerable to address the logistical and communicationneeds that arise during each classroom residency.This individual’s role as facilitator of the artistteacherplanning and reflection process, and his orher relationship with the artist, are critical tobuilding the artist’s partnership with the organization[See Watts, chapter 3, and Morgan, chapter 1].Modeling reflective practice. As part of the staff’sprofessional development, program managersidentify goals for their partnerships, formulatequestions about facilitation practice, and embarkon a reflection study [See Watts, chapter 3]. Theyalso use the backward-design method to identifygoals for partnership schools. Engaging staff inthe same professional development methodologiesas artists not only increases their skills andunderstanding, but also begins to build a cultureof reflective practice.Observing artists as theyteach allows for professionaldevelopment and buildsthe artist-organizationrelationship.Assessing artists’ teaching. Observing artists asthey teach allows for professional developmentand builds the artist-organization relationship.Assessment tools should clearly state criteria andset high standards for artists’ work with studentsand teachers. Whatever the evaluation system,engaging artists in conversations based on theobservation process facilitates learning andinfluences instruction.ArtsConnection’s artist assessment criteria aredeveloped as part of an ongoing dialogue withinthe organization. Program staff membersformulate these criteria, share them with theartists, and then revise them to incorporate artist24

feedback. In addition, artists can use observationtime to receive staff feedback on questions theymay have about their pedagogy. This give-andtakerenders the evaluation session a dialoguefocused on improving work rather than ajudgment of artists.Providing artists with support, modeling reflectivepractice, and linking artist assessment with professionaldevelopment has helped ArtsConnectionestablish long-term relationships of over five yearswith more than half of its teaching artists. Inadvancing open communication between artistsand staff members, these methods further theartist-organization partnership.Organization-to-Organization:Building AlliancesDeveloping relationships with other arts organizationsenhances professional development both forartists and staff. The New York City Alliance forTeaching Artist and Staff Development—a consortiumof ArtsConnection, Lincoln Center Institute,and Studio in a School—started seven years ago asan idea over lunch among three executivedirectors.These three organizations, of similar age andexperience but with different philosophies andmethodologies, formed the Alliance with severalobjectives in mind:• Managing growth and improving communicationat the executive staff level• Identifying common instructional or organizationalareas in need of improvement• Enhancing staff and artists’ understanding ofschool culture and strengthening the partnershipsbetween classroom teachers and teachingartists• Building the capacity of staff and artists,including increased knowledge of educationaltheory, curriculum development, and assessmentstrategies• Sharing successful arts-education and professional-developmentstrategies across organizations.The Alliance has also created a lab site at a gradeschool (PS 107) in Brooklyn where artists fromeach organization can plan, teach, and reflecttogether. Additional teaching artists from thethree organizations are also invited to observe thework of these artists and discuss pedagogy.PHOTO COURTESY OF ARTSCONNECTIONWhile the Alliance experience has been challengingin terms of resources, communication, andexpansion capacity, it offers many benefits. TheAlliance provides opportunities for teaching artistsand staff members to:• Learn new teaching strategies and methodologies• Build an understanding of the language andstructure of other organizations• Reexamine their assumptions about one another• Develop methods for working together withinthe same school• Strengthen identification with their own organization• Address the professional development of masterteaching artists and senior staff members.Arts Organizations to Influencethe Field of Arts EducationAt a recent conference on professional development,one arts administrator observed that “weseem to be having the same conversations withWorking hard at a traditional Native American artworkshop, at ArtsConnection’s Saturdays Alive program.25

the same people. How do we learn from theresearch in the field and move ahead? It seemsthat other professions—science, medicine, andlaw, for example—have a history of doing this.Why not arts education?”To avoid this “spinning our wheels” syndrome,arts organizations need to reexamine the methodologiesthey are developing, conduct research andapply it, and make their work public so that itmay be shared and evaluated within the profession.3 Creating such a shared knowledge base is achallenge, particularly for arts organizations thatfocus on delivering a product or service—there isno incentive to share knowledge when we staylocked inside a business model of competition. Butas we become more involved in the practices andresearch of the education community, we have tochange how we think and function as a field. Ifwe are to ensure quality arts learning and remainleaders within the field of arts education, we needto make our practitioner knowledge visible andengage with one another to assess and disseminateour learning. 4ConclusionTeaching artists are an arts organization’s richestresource. We need to support their relationshipswith students through an ongoing program ofprofessional development that nurtures collegiality,encourages continuous improvement, 5 andrespects their integrity as artists.If arts organizations, for their part, are to benefitfrom their artists’ teaching experience, they needto develop ways to harvest and share thatknowledge. Toward this end, ArtsConnection ismaking available the details of its professionaldevelopment program for artists. We hope thatthe “Professional Development” model and theworksheet in this chapter can serve as a tool fororganizations to examine their current program,identify next steps, and begin to explore structuresto support these goals.Building a faculty of articulate and reflectivepractitioners demands commitment and resourcesfrom the arts organization, but it is the mostviable way of enriching an artist’s work in theclassroom and strengthening the learning experiencefor students. ■3 James Heibert, Ronald Gallimore, and James W. Stigler. 2002(June/July). “A Knowledge Base for the Teaching Profession:What Would It Look Like and How Can We Get One?”5Educational Researcher, 31 (5): 3-15.James W. Stigler and James Hiebert. 1999. The Teaching Gap.New York: The Free Press.4 Hiebert, Gilmore, and Stigler.PHOTO BY PHIL MANSFIELDNami Kagami coaches a dance student in body alignment at PS 38k.26

CHAPTER 6A Case Study: Shall We Dance?Establishing an Inquiry-Based PartnershipBy Barbara Watanabe Batton“We learn from the company wekeep,” says psychologist/educatorFrank Smith. 1 This observationcertainly applies to my relationship, which datesfrom 1999, with several ArtsConnection staffmembers regarding Community ElementarySchool 53 in the Bronx.I came to the school as a teacher consultant of theElementary Teachers Network (ETN), a teachereducationprogram of the Institute for LiteracyStudies at Lehman College of the City Universityof New York. I worked to improve students’language and literacy competencies by firstimproving teacher practice, which was donethrough after-school study groups and classroomvisits. Participants in the ETN study group usedinquiry frameworks—including the Prospectdescriptive processes developed at the ProspectSchool in North Bennington, Vermont—thatdelved into the nature of children’s work toinform teacher practice and helped plan curricula.Meanwhile, ArtsConnection was providing danceandtheater-artist residencies for all 1,600 CES 53students, and I discovered that ArtsConnectionwas starting on a parallel path of professionaldevelopment to improve artists’ own teachingpractices. Our collaboration began when twoArtsConnection staff members joined the ETNstudy group, wishing to learn more about theProspect descriptive processes and how we usedthem. At the same time, I evaluated the work ofteaching artists in residence at the school—observing and interviewing them, attendingplanning and reflection meetings, and becomingpart of their ongoing conversation around professionaldevelopment.1 1998. The Book of Learning and Forgetting.New York: Teachers College Press.Barbara Watanabe Batton has worked withArtsConnection since 1999 as an evaluator and literacyconsultant. She co-developed the Video DescriptionProcess (VDP) with ArtsConnection staff at CES 53in the Bronx.These reciprocal apprenticeships developed into apartnership whose most tangible product, theVideo Description Process (VDP), was put intopractice at CES 53 in 2001.The Video Description ProcessFrom the outset, ETN’s and ArtsConnection’s goalsfor the VDP were to:• Foster collaborative inquiry and partnershipamong teachers, teaching artists, andArtsConnection staff• Study students in the act of learning in the arts• Develop language to examine the intrinsicbenefits of the arts.The VDP is adapted from a Prospect descriptiveprocess called the Description of Work, in whichthe study group (cohort) often begins by describingan object, such as a pine cone or a shell,rather than a person. In that way, participantsobserve and describe something for its own sakeand practice setting aside any judgments orinterpretations. This exercise lays the groundworkfor further practice with observation and descriptionof human beings.Over the span of a school year, participants in theETN-ArtsConnection partnership selected at leastone student to observe and describe while thestudent made or did something. There was nopredetermined format for collecting and recordingobservations—the purpose of the assignment wasto cultivate a habit among teachers of watchingstudents at work. Periodically, teacher participantsshared their observations and samples of students’work at study group sessions. These collaborativeinquiry reviews followed set protocols, which weadapted for the VDP process [See “VDPStructure,” p. 28].One VDP cohort met six times during a 20-weekdance residency in a fourth- and fifth-gradespecial-education class. The cohort included twoteaching artists from the Afro-Caribbeandance/music ensemble Retumba!, the classroom’s27

teacher, another (fifth-grade) classroom teacher,the visual-arts teacher who also taught the class,three ArtsConnection staff members (includingthe videographer), and myself.At the initial planning meeting, the specialeducationteacher selected three particularstudents to be videotaped during the VDP becauseshe was curious to see what impact the danceresidency would have on each of these individuals.One was a fifth-grade boy who had becomemore self-assured and physically comfortable indance as a result of a residency with the sameartists during the previous school year. The otherstudents, a boy and a girl, were fourth-graders.The girl was physically disabled but very selfconfident,and she liked to dance. The boy haddifficulty controlling his movements.As a group, we developed a focusing questionbased on what the teacher told us. Its firstiteration was: “What can we see about childrenusing dance to express themselves?” We quicklyrealized, however, that this question did notinclude dance-specific language and would nothave allowed us to examine the art form’s benefitsto the students. An ArtsConnection staff memberwith a dance background reframed it, using dancevocabulary and an artistic lens. The focusingquestion ultimately became: “How are studentsVDP Structure:The cohort of participants in the VDP usuallyincludes: the artist; the classroom teacher; one ortwo additional teachers who are working with thesame grade or with the same age group; two cofacilitators(usually a member of ArtsConnection’sstaff and a facilitator from the school); and,the videographer. Each group meets five timesafter school.Meeting 1: Classroom teacher selects three orfour children to focus on during the videotaping.In addition, she forms a focusing question basedon her selection of students. The question maybe refined over time with the support of othermembers in the residency cohort.Meetings 2, 3 and 4: The group meets threemore times to review videotaped sessions duringthe residency, usually the beginning, middle andfinal session. Depending on the length of theresidency, the number of meetings of the cohortmay be greater or fewer, but no less than two.The meetings are structured to allow everyone toparticipate equally in the process. The videotapedsession is viewed in its entirety, and each persongives his/her general/first impressions of thewhole session. After this “go-round,” the chairsummarizes by pulling forward large themesand/or issues raised.• The cohort discusses possible video clips thatstood out, citing places where the focus childrenwere visible and where something noteworthyoccurred. During this time, several possible clipsare often reviewed. A short segment (two tothree minutes) is selected.• The clip is reviewed (usually two more times),and participants describe what they notice achild was doing. A co-chair summarizes all ormost of these go-rounds. As the clips are reseen,the group generally begins to build ajointly constructed description of a child atwork. It has also proved useful, where possible,to review the selected clip without sound,making the child's physical presence andgestures even more visible.• At the end of each meeting, time permitting,each person responds to and critically reviewsthe group's work during the meeting, aprocedure known as the “process talk.”Meeting 5: The participants choose a twominutevideo clip segment from each videotapedsession that addresses the focusing question. Atthe end of the four meetings, the videographersplices the selected clips together, creating a sixtoeight-minute tape for viewing at a fifth andfinal meeting which includes additional teachers,artists, and staff—not more than 15 people. Thislarger body serves as an audience to whom thecohort “reports” the results of their collectivework. The participants follow an inquiry processthat is structured by go-rounds of description,intermittent summaries, and a final process talk.The VDP is a collaborative effort. Participantsmust monitor their own use of time, and beopen to varied points of view.Resources:Margaret Himley and Patricia F. Carini (Eds.). 2000. FromAnother Angle: Children’s Strengths and School Standards.New York: Teachers College Press.Patricia F. Carini. 2001.Starting Strong: A Different Look at Children,Schools and Standards. New York: Teachers College Press.28

learning to express themselves through dancein terms of physicality, movement, energy, andcontrol?”Taking our cues from someone trained in dancehelped to focus the group. Thus at each of foursubsequent meetings during the dance residency,the cohort reviewed the session videotaped thatday in its entirety and then selected anddescribed a short video clip from the session thatrevealed something noteworthy about thestudents in terms of physicality, movement,energy, and control.A premise of the Prospect descriptive processes is:“We learn to see a thing by learning to describeit.” In their four meetings, the cohort membersAll the students showedenthusiasm from havinglearned somethingnew and becoming partof a supportive community.therefore practiced attention and careful description;and speaking for myself, I certainly neededthat practice. As a chair, I was experienced infacilitating descriptive reviews, but as a participant-observerof dance I was a novice at describingit. Actually, the dance artists themselves, notaccustomed to describing dance in words, werenot especially articulate about identifying learningin their art form. But we all learned to attend toeach other’s observations and pool ourknowledge. At times I drew upon my own priorexperience with print literacy, making analogiesbetween these two kinds of learning to helpdecode dance steps and the quality of theirexecution.During the residency, each of the three studentsdemonstrated progress in learning dance. The boywith prior dance experience became a model forthe others in his class, adding expression in solosand incorporating his own dance vocabulary withthat of the teacher’s. But he told the teacher thatkeeping in mind the basic dance, as originallylearned, helped him to focus. The physicallychallenged girl was stiff at first and relied onanother girl for acceptance; by the end of theresidency, she combined the known and the new,integrating her own body shakes with teachertaughtdance steps. The other boy, who haddifficulty controlling his body in the classroom,was initially timid in his attempts to learn dancesteps. But he steadily became more comfortableand confident, sometimes taking risks by addingbreak dancing to his solo movements.All three of the students showed enthusiasm fromhaving learned something new and become partof a supportive community. And, according toPHOTO BY BRENDA KENNEALLYStudents design regalia for a performance based on their Native American studies.29

their teacher, what they learned through thedance experience about physicality, movement,energy, and control transferred over to positivelearning behaviors within the classroom.At its final meeting—merged with a larger forumcalled the VDP Meeting—the cohort presented thevideo clips selected in our previous meetings. Wedescribed the clips and addressed our focusingquestion, and we noted visible changes over timein the three students. Having closely watchedthem try to master steps, we could report howthey transitioned from being stiff and noninventiveto putting movement phrases togetherbit by bit, adding flair, and making the dancetheir own.Course Promotes LearningAcross DisciplinesIn the 2002-03 school year, those of us co-leadingthe ETN study group decided to include dance andtheater as part of an inquiry into arts and literacyconnections. The focusing question for thisinquiry was: “How can the arts experiences inArtsConnection residencies be extended andbroadened for children in ways that promote theirlearning across subject disciplines?”That same year, ETN offered a new credit-bearingcourse at CES 53, “Exploring Writing andLearning Alongside the Arts.” Its aim was tointroduce successful writing and art-makingstrategies to teachers, who in turn wouldPHOTO BY BARRY ORECKStudents from PS 282k perform at ArtsConnection's annual gala.Each meeting ended with “process talk,” anopportunity for participants to share thoughts andcomments about the experience. One cohortmember saw it as an opportunity to “learn howchildren learn dance, in particular, because it isnot verbal.” The classroom teacher said: “Itreconfirmed my beliefs that children learn differently[from each other] and that there is a need towatch and process individual learning styles and[figure out] how to incorporate it in teaching.”introduce them to students. The course exploredthe similarities and differences between reading,writing, and art; for example, it compared theprocesses of engagement in reading written textsand “reading” visual “texts.”In this curriculum-design workshop, participantsread a variety of texts (including photographs,reproductions of artwork, and videotapes ofchildren’s work in the performing arts), at times30

using descriptive inquiry processes. In addition tostudying at least one student, participantsdesigned and implemented a curriculum projectincorporating writing and art.What We LearnedAll of the meetings held during VDP cohorts wereaudiotaped, and those selected for study weretranscribed. This allowed a VDP research team,composed of ArtsConnection staff, school staff,and myself, to conduct a collaborative inquiryduring developmental stages of the VDP. (Moregenerally, this team was integral to the partnershipbetween the school, ETN, andArtsConnection.)At this writing, we are still in the process ofanalyzing our research on VDP cohorts. However,some tentative findings can be shared:• The VDP enabled teachers, teaching artists, andarts-education staff to focus a descriptive-inquirylens on students in the act of learning in thearts. Interviews conducted with teachers andteaching artists demonstrate the power of“kidwatching” (a term popularized by YettaGoodman).• The VDP provided a “third space” for teachersand artists to become partners in a meaningfulknowledge-making endeavor. Orinarily, teachersat CES 53 have few opportunities to regularlyconvene, except for grade groups and monthlyfaculty meetings, which allow little time forshared inquiry or collaborative learning. All ofthe participants in the VDP cohorts, however, feltthat this experience served to combat teacherisolation and created meaningful partnershipsbetween teachers and teaching artists.• Building a culture of inquiry among staff in aschool and within an arts-education organizationrequires time, perseverance, sustainedfunding, and supportive leadership. Thepartnership between the school, ETN, andArtsConnection was five years in the making—an eternity by the standards of most schoolsunder pressure to provide quick answers tocomplex problems.• There is a growing consensus among researchersthat “professional development yields the bestresults when it is long-term, school-based,collaborative, focused on students’ learning,and linked to curricula.” 2 The VDP has shownitself to be an effective model for manifestingthese criteria.The presence of performing-arts residencies in theschool over a span of years was an invitation todance, so to speak. It inspired the leaders of theETN study groups to transform study-groupsessions into art-making ateliers where teachersimagined and invented new classroom contextsfor learning through play and experimentation.As a result, teachers began to: 1) expand theirnotions of literacy, recognizing that arts andaesthetic education is also literacy education;2) offer time and space for play, choice, and artmakingin classrooms; and 3) develop skills,strategies, knowledge, and understanding toengage students in classroom-based projects thatconnect arts and literacy education.A kindergarten teacher, who participated bothin the ETN study group and two VDP cohorts,provides an example of how one teacher’sthinking and practice specifically changed inresponse to working with the arts and descriptiveinquiry. The VDP project “lets you see teachingfrom the child’s point of view,” she said. “Now,if I have the opportunity to observe a child, I’mmore careful and more focused because I realizethat a teacher can glean a lot of information justby watching a child’s reactions.”Inspired not only by the VDP project but moregenerally by the ETN study group and artsresidencies, this teacher has introduced severalclassroom-based projects linking art and literacy: adramatic rendering of the storybook Rainbow Fishto which parents were invited; outdoor sketchingin different seasons of trees that stand in front ofthe school; and a classroom picture book chroniclingwhat happened when each of her studentstook home a stuffed replica of Curious George.The teacher will also begin to incorporatemovement into her teaching. “We are doing aninquiry at the moment, called Shadows, in whichI take the kids outside and ask them to move,watch their shadows, and note the shapes thatthey make,” she said. “Every year I’ve been hereI’ve had a dance teacher, and although I hadn’tthought that I could do it myself, I think I will tryto do a little of the shape work that the danceteachers did.” ■2 James Heibert, Ronald Gallimore, and James W. Stigler. 2002(June/July). “A Knowledge Base for the Teaching Profession:What Would It Look Like and How Can We Get One?”Educational Researcher, 31 (5): 3-15, p.3.31

CHAPTER 7Connections: The Arts and Cognitive,Social, and Personal DevelopmentBy Rob Horowitz, Ed.D.Because arts learning is often thought totransfer to learning within otherdomains, assumptions of transfer areinherent to many arts partnerships. Yet thegeneral education and psychological communitieshave been consistently skeptical of this notion 1 orat the very least have supported more complexand multidimensional views of transfer 2 thangenerally acknowledged by arts-in-educationpractitioners. Even among arts educatorsthemselves, some have questioned the validity oftransfer of learning. All this has led to debates,sometimes vociferous, about whether the artsshould be taught for their own sake or for thetransfer of extrinsic outcomes.Recent studies have identified a number ofconnections between arts-learning experiencesand areas of student growth in academicdisciplines, intellectual skills, and social development.3 A recent review of multi-arts studiesidentified similar findings by different researchersdescribing effects of arts learning on general habitsof mind. 4 But other researchers have argued thatclaims about the effects of the arts on learningshould be muted, as most studies are correlationalor qualitative in design. These studies aretherefore limited in their ability to establish causalrelationships between the arts and other areas ofstudent development. 5The design of transfer studies in the arts has beenlimited by three factors: (1) adherence tooutmoded conceptions of learning and cognition;(2) overdependence on traditional, linear, causeand-effectmodels; and (3) the lack of valid,reliable, and usable instrumentation. 6Contemporary cognitive theory suggests possibleways around such limitations through recognizinga dynamic interaction within and across multipleRob Horowitz, Ed.D., is the associate director of theCenter for Arts Education Research at Teachers College,Columbia University. He serves as a consultant to artsorganizations, schools, school districts, and foundations.domains of thinking and learning. 7 Just asphysicists and mathematicians have long movedfrom an absolute belief in closed comprehensiblesystems, and neuroscientists now describe a brainthat is more plastic than previously thought, artsresearchers might also broaden their view. Wemight look to a different model of transfer, basedon a conception of multidimensional and interactivelearning, within and across subject andthinking domains.Rather than simply attempting to understand theimpact of one variable on another—such aslearning in the arts on academic achievement, forinstance—we can think of variables as entangled,interacting with each another in multiple ways.Or, to put this in more concrete terms, children’svarious experiences, both in and out of school,each contribute in different ways to their overalldevelopment and their learning in particulardisciplines.Thinking this way about transfer, on the otherhand, confounds a researcher’s ability to constructa compelling transfer study. If the relevantvariables are hopelessly entangled, how do weunravel them enough to define and measurethem and then investigate their relationships?One useful approach is to view our array of socialscience techniques and statistical tests as aheuristic device—a tool to help us understandhow aspects of learning and instruction relate toeach other—instead of as a means for supportingor discarding a cause-and-effect hypothesis.Through a heuristic conception, we can applyresearch techniques toward identifying anddefining areas of learning and how they mightinteract with other experiences.A more practical limitation in designing artstransferstudies has been the lack of available,valid, and reliable instrumentation to measurethe process of arts teaching and its relationshipwith various types of learning and development.In one study, researchers developed a model ofcognitive skills, social competencies, and personalEndnotes and references for this chapter can be foundon page 48.32

PHOTO COURTESY OF ARTSCONNECTIONdispositions—operational within the arts-learningexperience, and also applicable to other learningcontexts—that might serve as the mechanism oftransfer. 8 Students demonstrated ways ofthinking, means of interacting, and self-perceptionsthat gave insight into how learning in thearts influences other kinds of learning, and viceversa. However, the researchers also noted thattheir instrumentation was not sufficiently accurateto measure these areas of cognitive, social, andMaking art in a hands-on workshop at ArtsConnection’sSaturdays Alive program.personal development. Further qualitative workwas needed to confirm and define aspects of themodel so that more precise measurements mightbe developed.The consequent study presented in this papersought to develop and test a set of instrumentsbased on the cognitive-social-personal modeldeveloped by Burton, Horowitz, and Abeles. Thiswork, as a preliminary step towards further studyof transfer, was largely qualitative, but it resultedin a set of instruments that was tested in threeelementary schools.Initial Lines of InquiryThe purpose of this study was to: (1) identify anddefine areas of development—supported by artslearning—within cognitive, personal, and socialdomains; (2) identify and define characteristics ofthe process of partnership and instruction thatmost likely influence those cognitive, personal,and social areas of development; and (3) investigatethe relationship between the process ofpartnership and instruction on the one hand andstudents’ development on the other.The study took place over seven years in fourNew York City public elementary schools, 9 eachof which participated in long-term arts partnershipswith ArtsConnection. At first,ArtsConnection took the lead in partnershipactivities, providing facilitation and coordinatingschedules. But as the relationship matured,teachers and school staff became increasinglyequal partners in the collaboration.Instruction was provided by teaching artists andclassroom teachers. Artist residencies weretypically 8 to 15 weeks long, with about an hour aweek of direct student contact with the artist.Instruction was provided in various arts disciplinesand cultures over the initial four-year period, andcurriculum links were established between thearts and academic subjects, particularly Englishand social studies. In the last three years of thestudy, arts instruction was focused on dance,drama, and their connections to literacy instruction.The student body, which ranged fromkindergarten through fifth grade, was exceptionallydiverse, representing a number of countries andspeaking many different languages.ArtsConnection and the schools held planningmeetings and retreats, developed curriculum, andcoordinated resources and scheduling. Artists andteachers co-planned the artists’ curriculum inorder to tailor it to the school’s curriculum.ArtsConnection provided professional developmentfor teachers and artists, and regularlyscheduled “reflection meetings” between artistsand teachers to discuss children’s learning andinstructional issues. At the end of each artist’sresidency, children also participated in a reflectionmeeting, again facilitated by ArtsConnection, totalk with the artist and teacher about what theyhad learned.The first four years of research included threequalitative phases: 101. Descriptive Study: Researchers in site observationswrote rich descriptions of artist residencies’classes as well as of planning and reflectionmeetings. Teachers, artists, administrators, andchildren were interviewed and surveyed.2. Behavior Collection Study: During observationsof artist residencies, researchers viewed individualchildren according to protocols based on the33

New York State Learning Standards in the Arts.We attempted to identify and document whatthey did, what they said, what they produced,or what they performed that would indicatelearning to the observer.3. Perceptions of Impact Study: In this phase, wegathered data on children’s, teachers’, andteaching artists’ perceptions of impact. Wedeveloped sets of research questions organizedinto six lines of inquiry, based on participants’perceptions of program impact on other participants.Data collection included classroomobservations along with interviews/surveys ofteachers, artists, and children. 11Data from these research phases were analyzedwith HyperResearch 2.0 qualitative data-analysissoftware, with which we sought to triangulate andidentify common patterns in the data fromdifferent research phases, data-collection methods,observers, and data sources. We concluded fromthe first four years of the study that the overallmodel of transfer of learning adapted fromBurton, Horowitz, and Abeles was stable (withsome minor revision) and applicable to thecontext of the arts partnerships. 12“We found qualitative evidence that the artssupported cognitive skills, such as creativity,elaboration, originality, verbal expression, andthe ability to adapt multiple vantage pointsand perspectives. There were notable gains insome social competencies, particularly theability to learn cooperatively in groups and todevelop different relationships with peers andadults. The effects on personal learningdimensions were particularly salient. Theseincluded perceived gains in positive risktaking,self-confidence, task persistence, andmotivation.” 13Several days after the terrorist attacks ofSeptember 11, 2001, ArtsConnection was awardeda U.S. Department of Education (USDE) ModelDevelopment and Dissemination grant. Althoughmuch of New York City’s arts-in-educationprogramming was temporarily shut down orreduced at that time, ArtsConnection moved asquickly as possible to add several features to itspartnership programs. These included two newcomponents of professional development forteaching artists: “curriculum articulation” sessions(designed to help teaching artists define andarticulate their curriculum with the overall goal ofsequencing arts instruction in the partnerschools); and workshops on applying theories ofchild development to their school residencies.ArtsConnection also began several strands ofaction research, including documentation of itsbest methods for engaging teachers and schoolsand management of its collaborations.Additionally, ArtsConnection expanded its use ofthe Video Description Process (VDP), a form ofdescriptive review. In VDP sessions, participants 14observed videos of children in arts residencies,commented on the children’s behavior, and drewinferences from it. All VDP sessions, as well asmany other program components, were recordedand transcribed [See Batton, chapter 6].The USDE grant also enabled us to add two newNew York City elementary schools to the researchstudy. We conducted extensive ethnographicobservations within these schools; observations ofcurriculum-articulation meetings and childWe found qualitativeevidence that the artssupported cognitive skills,such as creativity,elaboration, originality,verbal expression.development workshops; observations of participatingartists and teachers in the VideoDescription Process; and observations of (alongwith participation in) teacher planning sessions,professional-development sessions, and reflectionmeetings.After the first year of the expanded study(2001–2002 school year), all data were againcoded and analyzed with HyperResearch 2.0. Wesought to confirm that data from the new schools(and more generally from the new grant’sprogramming) were consistent with the modeldeveloped in our prior research. Indeed, the datafrom all the schools were remarkably consistent interms of potential effects on students, althoughdimensions of collaboration and partnershipvaried according to individual school (andclassroom) contexts.One goal of the new USDE grant was forArtsConnection to develop connections betweenthe arts and literacy. Therefore we also examinedthe data to see if classrooms with the strongestarts programming and the most evidence of34

PHOTO BY PHIL MANSFIELDJessica Nicoll encourages dancers at PS 282k to consider their movement quality.cognitive, social, and personal development alsoshowed evidence of potential gains in academicareas. We, in fact, found many parallel competencieswithin the arts and English language arts(ELA) skills. These connections were most obviousbetween drama and ELA, particularly in verbalexpression and listening skills. Children indrama/storytelling residencies also learned tointerpret texts and understand narrative, dramaticsequence, and character development. There wassimilar, though less apparent, development withinthe dance residencies, as children also learned tothink kinesthetically and express and representideas and feelings through movement.Moreover, we found that participating teachersacquired confidence and ability in using the arts intheir classrooms, often going as far as co-planningwith artists and developing collaborative curricula[See Nicoll, chapter 2].Case StudiesDuring winter–spring 2003, researchers conductedcase studies of individual artist residencies, basedon the selection of three exemplary collaboratingteachers within two of the schools. The overallobjective of the case studies was to gatheradditional descriptive data on literacy development;cognitive, social, and personal development;and the characteristics and behaviors of outstandingartist-teacher collaborations. 15 A researcherwas assigned to each classroom to observe acomplete artist residency (fifth grade storytelling,second grade puppetry, and second grade dance);and data collection in these case studies includednot only observations, but also interviews andexamination of student work.The following set of questions was developed toguide the fieldwork. Researchers were notexpected to provide answers to these questions,but instead to gather rich descriptions of relevantbehaviors for later analysis.1. What conditions or characteristics of the artistteacherpartnerships are most conducive tostudent learning?2. What conditions or characteristics of the artistteacherpartnerships are most likely to lead tosuccessful changes in classroom-teacherpractice?35

3. Can children’s development in cognitive, social,and personal domains be better defined? Whatdo children make, do, perform, say, or writethat indicates growth in these areas?4. Are there observable gains in student literacy?What do children make, do, perform, say, orwrite that indicates growth in literacy? Is therea relationship between literacy developmentand the residencies’ content or structure? If so,what kinds of literacy and how would literacybe defined?5. If there are observable changes in studentlearning—either in cognitive, social, andpersonal domains or in literacy—how do thesechanges occur? What circumstances facilitatechange? Is student growth more likely whenartists and teachers make explicit connectionsbetween different areas of learning (such as artsand literacy)?Data of these kinds from the case studies werecoded and added to the database described in thenext section.Selection of Variables andDevelopment of Item PoolShort extracts of qualitative data that describedstudent development or the process of partnershipand instruction were culled from the completeseven-year set. The data included: (1) descriptivefield reports; (2) focused behavioral observations;(3) interviews with teachers, artists, children,principals, and ArtsConnection staff; (4)transcripts and observations of VDP sessions,curriculum-articulation meetings, developmentworkshops, reflection sessions, and planningmeetings; (5) case-study reports and supplementaldata; and (6) ArtsConnection’s action-researchdata on effective collaborations, includinginterview transcripts. Most extracts were limitedto 255 characters.The data were aggregated into a new, combineddatabase and recoded to reflect the most salientvariables. Each data extract was assigned one ortwo codes identifying the variables. Examples ofpotential codes included: elaborative thinking,expression of ideas of feelings, focused perception,cooperative learning, self-confidence, motivation,and students’ senses of ownership of theirlearning.A total of 3,137 coded extracts were entered intothe database. Potential rating-scale items werethen developed from the exact language of thedata so that the items reflected the thoughts ofteachers, artists, children, and field researchers asmuch as possible. Sometimes the extract wasparaphrased or adapted, however, to create thescale items. Up to three rating-scale items werePHOTO BY BRENDA KENNEALLYVictor Moag leading an expressive warm-up exercise.36

PHOTO BY BRENDA KENNEALLYStudents dance to the beat of the drum.developed for each of the 3,137 coded dataextracts, yielding 3,333 scale items. Most of theseitems referenced areas in the cognitive-socialpersonalmodel, while others were drawn fromareas of partnership implementation and teacherparticipation.Several examples will help illustrate the itemdevelopmentprocess. In an observation report, afield researcher wrote, “[The artist] and theteachers have worked to integrate the residencycontent into the regular classroom curriculum, butthis required communication and a willingness tonegotiate on both sides.” Two potential scale itemswere constructed from this extract to representthe variable collaboration between teachers and artists:Artists and teachers had good communicationand showed a willingness to negotiate.Artists and teachers worked together tointegrate the residency content into theregular classroom curriculum.When the rating scales were later administered toteachers, the latter item was changed to:I worked together with teachers to integratethe residency content into the regularclassroom curriculum.Other items representing the collaborationvariable included:Teachers and artists worked together to fostera supportive and warm environment.Collaboration between artists and teachersreflected negotiation, compromise, and a realcommitment for the long haul.Collaboration betweenartists and teachersreflected negotiation,compromise, and a realcommitment for thelong haul.This process helped us identify and define theconstruct of artist-teacher collaboration.Descriptors such as supportive, warm, negotiation,compromise, and commitment all contribute to aworking definition of what collaboration betweenartists and teachers meant to those involved in theArtsConnection partnerships. If a process was bothlaborious and fascinating, we repeated thismethod with the other variables under study.For example, one teacher emphasized during aninterview how children’s accomplishments hadexceeded his expectations. As he tried to explainhow this had happened, he said, “You know,37

sometimes we think that they won’t be able to doit. But we challenge them, and then we see theresults because they did.” From this extract wedeveloped the following rating-scale item reflectingthe variable motivation:Children accomplished more than expectedbecause they were challenged.This item exemplifies some of the difficulties ofthis process. It contains three ideas—accomplishment,expectations, and challenges—and couldalso fit other variables, such as reflecting teacherperceptions or sticking with difficult tasks.In another interview, a teacher talked aboutobserving connections between a dance residencyand writing skills: “In those classes the connectionbetween what [the artist] is doing and what theyare drawing or what they are writing is reallystrong, so the parents are seeing that some more.”We constructed this item reflecting the variablewriting process:The connection is really strong between whatthe children produced in the arts and in theirwriting. A field researcher quoted a storytellertalking to a fifth-grade class:[The artist] explains that the story is not reallyyours until you “understand it and …well, youmake it yours by putting your own details andwords in it. It’s not really yours if you arememorizing the words. The words should be yourwords, your perspective.”This data extract was reduced to the followingscale item, reflecting elaboration:Students learned that their work was reallytheirs when they put in their own details.Construction and Administrationof Rating ScalesItems were selected from the database torepresent these variables:• Collaboration between teachers and artists• Elaboration• Expression of ideas or feelings• Cooperative learning• New or better relationships with students• Self-confidence• Motivation• Ownership of learningPHOTO COURTESY OF ARTSCONNECTIONChildren and their families participate inArtsConnection’s Saturdays Alive program.• Writing process• Teacher buy-in• Teachers’ comfort/knowledge with the arts• Teachers seeing students in a new light• School leadership• School climate.The items were paired with a five-point Likerttypescale (with a range from “strongly disagree”to “strongly agree”), and the rating scales wereadministered to teachers in three of the partnershipschools. Every teacher in each schoolresponded to the rating scales unless they wereabsent the day of administration (N = 53).Frequencies, means, and standard deviations wereobtained for each item.Overall, teachers responded very favorably,indicating strong teacher support for the program.The results also provide additional evidence thatthe program inspires positive changes in teacherpractice and student development. However, theseresults may also indicate that the scales did notsufficiently discriminate among respondents. (Inthe following tables, 5 = Strongly Agree; 4 =Somewhat Agree; 3 = Not Sure; 2 = SomewhatDisagree; and 1 = Strongly Disagree.)38

Collaboration betweenTeachers and ArtistsTeachers responded quite positively to items aboutcollaboration. They reported that they “had goodcommunication” with artists and “worked togetherto foster a supportive and warm environment.”The concept of “negotiation, compromise, and areal commitment for the long haul” exemplifies anideal collaboration [See table below].ElaborationOne component of creative thinking is elaboration—theability to work in detail and developideas, going beyond minimal expectations. 16 Weoften found evidence of elaborative thinking aswe observed children adding details to artwork,storytelling, or writing. In response to rating-scaleitems, teachers were most likely to respond thatchildren felt their work “was really theirs whenthey put in their own details [See table below].”In interviews, many teachers reported gains inverbal and written expressive abilities. We too,over the course of the study, observed childrendevelop their ability to discuss art and artmaking. They regularly expressed their reactionsto their arts experiences through reflectionmeetings and writing.Moreover, the arts naturally provided manyopportunities for non-verbal expression. Herea fifth-grader related a dance experience:I would express myself so everyone that was in theaudience—we had the movements—knew we wereacting like fish. ... It was more expressive becausesome parts you didn’t speak. … It’s like you wouldact like the Buddha. You’d be quiet and thenwithout talking you would just do the movement. …You see, we didn’t have to make the noise. We’djust move and that’s it.Collaboration between Teachers and ArtistsScale Item 5 4 3 2 1 Mean SDArtists and teachers had good communicationand showed a willingness to negotiate.Teachers and artists worked together to foster asupportive and warm environment.Collaboration between artists and teachers reflectednegotiation, compromise, and a real commitment forthe long haul.I had regular and meaningful communication with theresident artists.I really enjoyed building a collaborative partnershipwith the artists.75.4% 24.6% 0% 0% 0% 4.75 .43475.0% 23.2% 1.8% 0% 0% 4.73 .48666.7% 28.1% 5.3% 0% 0% 4.61 .59060.7% 32.1% 1.8% 5.4% 0% 4.48 .78664.9% 29.8% 3.5% 1.8% 0% 4.58 .653ElaborationScale Item 5 4 3 2 1 Mean SDStudents came up with amazing details in their work. 31.6% 47.4% 17.5% 3.5% 0% 4.07 .799Students focused on making sure that they includedinteresting and clear details in their work.Students learned that their work was really theirswhen they put in their own details.16.1% 58.9% 19.6% 5.4% 0% 3.86 .74944.6% 39.3% 16.1% 0% 0% 4.29 .731Students added sensory details to their work. 26.8% 41.1% 26.8% 5.4% 0% 3.89 .86739

Expression of Ideas or FeelingsTeachers responded very favorably to items aboutexpressive abilities, agreeing that “students’ levelof expression increased” and they “expressedthemselves creatively and independently [Seetable below].”Cooperative LearningThroughout the study, we observed childrenlearning to work together effectively on long-termarts projects. Teachers responded very favorably toitems about cooperative learning, agreeing thatchildren understood that “everyone couldcontribute” to the group and that “they couldwork together on group arts projects despite theirdifferences [See table below].”New or Better Relationships withStudentsTeachers reported that the arts projects helpedstudents develop better relationships and “openup” to other students. There were no negativeresponses to this item [See table below].Expression of Ideas or FeelingsScale Item 5 4 3 2 1 Mean SDStudents learned to add expressive qualities to theirwork.Students' level of expression increased as theresidency progressed.Children expressed themselves creatively andindependently.50.9% 40.4% 5.3% 3.5% 0% 4.39 .75052.6% 43.9% 3.5% 0% 0% 4.49 .57151.8% 42.9% 3.6% 1.8% 0% 4.45 .658Students learned to express what they felt. 38.6% 54.4% 5.3% 1.8% 0% 4.30 .654Cooperative LearningScale Item 5 4 3 2 1 Mean SDChildren in group work understood that they werenot out there all alone, and that everyone couldcontribute.Students working in groups demonstrated goodcoordination, allowing each other turns to speak andtry out each other's ideas.The children realized they could work together ongroup arts projects despite their differences.In groups, students could put aside their differencesto reach a common goal.66.7% 24.6% 7.0% 1.80% 0% 4.56 .70838.6% 52.6% 7.0% 1.8% 0% 4.28 .67549.1% 36.8% 14.0% 0% 0% 4.35 .71932.1% 44.6% 19.6% 3.6% 0% 4.05 .818New or Better Relationships with StudentsScale Item 5 4 3 2 1 Mean SDIsolated students opened up to other studentsthrough their arts experiences.42.1% 36.8% 21.1% 0% 0% 4.21 .77340

Self-ConfidenceTeachers often spoke to us of growth in children’sself-esteem. As we tried to understand what theymeant by self-esteem, we concluded that thephenomenon they described was not really areflection of self-worth but instead linked tochanges in perceptions of self-confidence and asense of competence. This was clearly tied to thechildren’s courage to take risks and theirnewfound willingness to express themselvesbefore the school community.In interviews, several children poignantlydescribed new self-perceptions.I learned that I thought I was shy, but I’m not.I learned that I’m not that shy. I can do it.When we were doing it, I thought I was interesting.I thought I wouldn’t be.There were no negative responses by teachers tothis item about self-confidence [See table below].MotivationAccording to our analysis of qualitative data, theresidencies engaged students and increased theirmotivation to participate. They developed acapacity for sustained effort on challenging tasks.Some students told us that they worked harderwith the resident artists than with their classroomteachers. This may be attributable in part to thenature of arts learning: the arts are seen as moreenjoyable by some children, though they alsorequire concentrated effort. However, in fairnessto their classroom teachers, the change from thenormal routine may have also been appealing.Student: We didn’t really try our best [before].Then when we got the teachers forArtsConnection, we did all of that.Interviewer: Why do you think you didbetter work?Student: Maybe it’s because that [in the regularclass we aren’t] actually getting up and doingsomething that we’re learning something new.So we want to really get into it. Because I knowthat when we do math?Interviewer: Mm-hmm.Student: Like, I do it real quick because I know it.Like I lay down on my chair until we get anotherproblem or our teacher starts talking. I alreadyknew it. So I get that spare time. But then withthe ArtsConnection people I don’t have time to dothat because it’s like a whole new thing.Interviewer: I see.Student: And I want to start getting into it.A majority of teachers agreed that “difficultstudents tried harder” in the residencies whenresponding to rating-scale items on motivation[See table below].Self-ConfidenceScale Item 5 4 3 2 1 Mean SDStudents' confidence developed as the residenciesprogressed.63.2% 29.8% 7.0% 0% 0% 4.56 .627MotivationScale Item 5 4 3 2 1 Mean SDChildren accomplished more than expected becausethey were challenged.Otherwise-difficult students tried harder in the artsclasses.33.3% 52.6% 12.3% 1.8% 0% 4.18 .71035.1% 40.4% 15.8% 7.0% 1.8% 4.00 .98241

Ownership of LearningTeachers responded favorably to items onstudents’ ownership of their learning process.Teachers agreed that their artwork “belonged tothem” and “reflected their personal experience[See table below].”Writing ProcessSeventy-six percent of teachers strongly orsomewhat agreed that there was a strong connectionbetween what “children produced in the artsand in their writing,” and 66 percent of teachersagreed that “students incorporated vocabulary andexpression from arts classes in their writing[See table below].”Teacher Buy-InWe also developed and administered rating scalesmeasuring teachers’ attitudes toward their owndevelopment and participation. For example,through their responses to a rating scale of teacher“buy-in” to the arts residencies, teachers indicatedstrong support for the goals and practice of theprogram. They valued the arts experiences and“embraced the residencies,” preparing their classesfor the artist visits [See table below].Ownership of LearningScale Item 5 4 3 2 1 Mean SDStudents’ artwork reflected their personal experience. 52.6% 29.8% 15.8% 1.8% 0% 4.33 .809Students felt that they decided what was in their ownartwork.Students felt that their work belonged to them, not tothe teacher or artist.38.6% 43.9% 12.3% 3.5% 1.8% 4.14 .89554.4% 33.3% 10.5% 1.8% 0% 4.40 .753Writing ProcessScale Item 5 4 3 2 1 Mean SDThe connection is really strong between what thechildren produced in the arts and in their writing.Students incorporated vocabulary and expressionfrom arts classes in their writing.Students had many opportunities to write about theirarts experiences, which helped their literacy.Students with ELA difficulties now take more risks intheir use of language due to the residencies.26.3% 50.9% 19.3% 3.5% 0% 4.00 .77930.4% 35.7% 30.4% 3.6% 0% 3.93 .87127.8% 42.6% 16.7% 13.0% 0% 3.85 .97927.8% 40.7% 29.6% 1.9% 0% 3.94 .811Teacher Buy-InScale Item 5 4 3 2 1 Mean SDI value the arts experiences as addressing anotherpart of the child that tests do not.Teachers embraced the residencies and prepared theclass before artists arrived.78.9% 17.5% 3.5% 0% 0% 4.75 .51059.6% 33.3% 3.5% 1.8% 1.8% 4.47 .80442

Comfort Level and Knowledgewith Performing, Teaching, orDiscussing the ArtsTeachers are more likely to successfullycollaborate with an artist if they are comfortableand confident about using the arts in theclassroom. Teachers reported that they gainedan “understanding of what it means to teachin an art form” and that the residencies helped“expand the way I teach.” While positive,responses were solidly in the “somewhat agree”category (as opposed to “strongly agree”)[See table below].Seeing Students in a New Light orfrom a Different PerspectiveIn interviews, teachers often reported that the artsresidencies helped them learn more about thepotential of their students. They would sometimesdescribe new relationships with children that theyhad thought were “unreachable.”There’s S_____, who I had never seen smile until shewas doing the Chinese fan dance. And she wouldsmile while she was doing it. [Before] she neversmiled. Nada, … you know. I can relate to her betterbecause now she’s smiling for me in the room.In responding to rating scales, teachers agreed that“children who struggle with their reading andwriting can succeed in other ways,” and theynoticed “different abilities” through the residencies[See table below].Comfort Level and Knowledge with Performing, Teaching, or Discussing the ArtsScale Item 5 4 3 2 1 Mean SDThe arts residencies have totally changed theway I teach.Reflecting with children had an impact on myinstruction.I use arts more in my lessons as a result of theresidencies.I have a better understanding of what it means toteach in an art form because of the residencies.The arts residencies helped me expand theway I teach.10.5% 40.4% 31.6% 12.3% 5.3% 3.39 1.01333.9% 42.9% 17.9% 3.6% 1.8% 4.04 .91424.6% 47.4% 19.3% 7.0% 1.8% 3.86 .93437.5% 48.2% 8.9% 3.6% 1.8% 4.16 .86928.1% 50.9% 15.8% 1.8% 3.5% 3.98 .916Seeing Students in a New Light or from a Different PerspectiveScale Item 5 4 3 2 1 Mean SDI see my students differently as a result of the artsresidencies.Through the residencies, I noticed that children whostruggle with their reading and writing can succeedin other ways.I observed different abilities in students because ofthe residencies.25.0% 42.9% 25% 5.4% 1.8% 3.84 .93062.5% 30.4% 7.1% 0% 0% 4.55 .63063.2% 31.6% 3.5% 1.8% 0% 4.56 .65543

School LeadershipTeachers responded positively to items on schoolleadership, noting that their principals were “veryinformed and committed to the program” and“personally involved” in making sure it “fit theneeds of the school [See table below].”School ClimateTeachers reported that the program improvedschool climate, agreeing that “the wholeatmosphere has changed at our school” becauseof the arts. There were no negative responses tothis item [See table below].Relationships among VariablesThe mean scores obtained for each rating scalewere useful in comparing teacher responsesregarding the different variables.Mean Scores for Student-DevelopmentVariablesWhen assessing student development, teacherswere most likely to attribute gains in selfconfidenceand expression to the residencies.They were least likely to report gains in elaborationand the writing process. (Reminder: Meanscores can range from 1 to 5, with a score of ‘1’indicating ‘strongly disagree’ and a score of 5indicating ‘strongly agree’, the highest rating.)[See table below].Mean Scores for Teacherand School VariablesTeachers responded most favorably to itemsabout collaboration with artists. They were lesslikely to report gains in comfort with the arts[See table below].School LeadershipScale Item 5 4 3 2 1 Mean SDPrincipal was personally involved in selection ofresidencies so they fit the needs of the school.Principal made a conscious decision to choosespecific art forms for the residencies to match theneeds of the students.Principal was very informed and committed to theprogram.47.6% 21.4% 26.2% 2.4% 2.4% 4.10 1.03145.2% 26.2% 23.8% 2.4% 2.4% 4.10 1.00864.3% 28.6% 2.4% 4.8% 0% 4.52 .773School ClimateScale Item 5 4 3 2 1 Mean SDThe whole atmosphere has changed at our schoolbecause of the presence of the arts.47.6% 40.5% 11.9% 0% 0% 4.36 .692Mean Scores for Student-Development VariablesWritingProcessOwnership Motivation CooperativeLearningExpression Elaboration StudentRelationsSelfConfidence3.92 4.29 4.09 4.26 4.41 4.02 4.21 4.56Mean Scores for Teacher and School VariablesCollaboration School Climate Comfort LEVEL withTHE ArtsSeeing Students inNew LightLeadership4.63 4.39 3.86 4.29 4.2444

We also examined relationships among the ratedvariables. There were many significant correlationsbetween variables on implementation andvariables on student outcomes.We obtained Pearsons r correlation estimates forthe variables measured by the rating scales. Thevariable collaboration between teachers andartists was significantly associated with students’elaboration (r = .42, p < .01), expression(r = .59, p < .01), cooperative learning (r = .57,p < .01), motivation (r = .53, p < .01),ownership of learning (r = .50, p < .01), andwriting process (r = .55, p < .01). Those teacherswho reported the most productive collaborationwith artists and other teachers were more likelyto report student improvement in these areas.Teachers’ comfort level with the arts wassignificantly associated with students’ elaboration(r = .59, p < .01), expression (r = .49, p < .01),cooperative learning (r = .54, p < .01),motivation (r = .72, p < .01), ownership oflearning (r = .47, p < .01), and writing process(r = .70, p < .01). Those teachers who reported thegreatest gains in their own comfort with using thearts in their classroom were more likely to reportstudent improvement in these areas.Residency Experienceand Rating Scale ResultsWhen teachers were asked to indicate the totalnumber of ArtsConnection artist residencies theyhad participated in, the number ranged from 1 to14 residencies, with a mean of 5.87.We compared teachers who had the most experiencewith artist residencies (upper quartile) toteachers with the least experience (lowestquartile). The most experienced teachers hadhigher mean scores in ratings of collaborationwith artists, comfort level with the arts, seeingstudents in a new light, and school leadership.Differences between the groups were greatest inthe area of comfort level with the arts. 17Teachers having the most experience with artistresidencies also rated their students higher inexpression, elaboration, imagination, 18 andwriting process. The biggest differences betweengroups were in the areas of elaboration andwriting process. 195.004.003.002.001.00The most experienced teachers rated theirstudents more highly in the social dimensions:cooperative learning and better relationships withother students. The biggest differences were in thearea of better relationships with other students.5.004.003.00Cognitive and Writing Variables Comparedwith Number of Residencies4.074.71 4.633.493.674.50 4.573.25Expression Elaboration Imagination Writing ProcessFewest ResidenciesSocial Variables Compared withNumber of Residencies4.01Most Residencies4.63 4.713.605.00Process Variables Compared withNumber of Residencies2.004.004.224.643.963.834.394.003.801.00Cooperative LearningFewest ResidenciesStudent RelationsMost Residencies3.003.262.001.00Collaboration Comfort/Knowledgew/ArtsFewest ResidenciesNew LightMost ResidenciesLeadership45

The most experienced teachers rated theirstudents more highly in areas of personaldevelopment: risk-taking, 20 ownership oflearning, motivation, and self-confidence.The quartile having the greatest comfort withusing the arts also rated students higher inmeasures of risk-taking, ownership, motivation,and self-confidence.5.004.00Personal Variables Compared withNumber of Residencies3.924.624.044.76 4.714.274.865.004.00Comfort with Arts Compared with Personal Variables4.764.864.624.714.273.924.043.003.403.003.402.002.001.00Risk-Taking Ownership Motivation Self-Confidence1.00Risk-Taking Ownership Motivation Self-ConfidenceFewest ResidenciesMost ResidenciesFewest ResidenciesMost Residencies5.004.003.002.001.00We also identified the highest and lowest quartilesof teachers reporting gains in comfort level withthe arts. Those teachers reporting the greatestgains in this variable also reported the most gainsin students’ expression, imagination, writingprocess, and elaboration. The greatest differenceswere in elaborative thinking and writing.Comfort with Arts Compared with Cognitive Variables4.014.633.674.50 4.57 4.623.253.49Expression Imagination Writing Process ElaborationFewest ResidenciesMost ResidenciesConclusions and ImplicationsThe results from the rating scales are consistentwith our qualitative findings. In classrooms withthe most effective instruction and collaboration byartists and teachers, students were more likely todemonstrate cognitive skills such as elaborativethinking, verbal and nonverbal expressive abilitieswithin different contexts, focused perception, andthe reapplication of learning within new contexts.Students also were more likely to demonstrateimprovement in social skills—cooperative learningand improved relationships with teachers andpeers—and to show changes in the self-perceptionand personal-growth areas of positive risk-taking,self-confidence, motivation, and sense ofownership of the learning process. Within certaininstructional contexts, students were able to applysome of these skills—elaborative thinking, forexample—in their development of verbal andwritten expressive abilities.These areas of student development were significantlyassociated with areas of teacher growth andchange, such as the application of new skills inthe classroom, increased ability to integrate thearts, greater comfort with using the arts, buy-inand commitment to the program, and enhancedperceptions of students’ abilities.46

Over the course of the study, we observedteachers becoming far more adept and confidentat integrating the arts into the classroom. Theybecame more sophisticated at working withvisiting artists, articulating their needs, andcoordinating their curriculum with the artists andother teachers.The residencies also provided teachers with theopportunity to see aspects of their students thatwould otherwise not be apparent. Through thearts projects they gained new perspectives onindividual students’ abilities, achievements,character, and personality, perspectives they oftenconveyed to us with compelling stories duringinterviews. Such insights sometimes led toincreased expectations for students’ achievementin other subject areas as well, thereby alteringtheir trajectories through the elementary schoolexperience. These valuable areas of teachergrowth were made possible through sustainedfunding and organizational support by the schoolsand ArtsConnection.The set of instruments developed through thisstudy can be used by other researchers to testthese findings, investigate student learning, andevaluate arts programs and partnerships. 21Perhaps more significant is that the instrumentshave already contributed to our understanding ofthe general habits of mind stimulated by learningin the arts, and this understanding may lay thegroundwork for continued research.In particular, the areas of cognitive, social,and personal growth explored in this studypresent valuable options for research on thepotential effects of arts learning. These areasof student development, after all, are not onlyinherent to the arts, but are also operational inother educational and lifelong contexts.Continued investigation can help unravel relationshipsbetween such contexts and contribute to ourunderstanding of learning within and acrosssubject and thinking domains.Recently, there has been increasing emphasis,resulting in overemphasis, on using standardizedtest scores in academic subjects to evaluate allaspects of education, including arts teaching andlearning. This has led to a narrowing of thecurriculum to testable skills in core subjects and ade-emphasis on arts instruction. Evaluators of artspartnerships have increasingly been required toprovide evidence of program effectiveness throughexperimental research designs and outcome-basedPHOTO BY BRENDA KENNEALLYevaluations, using standardized tests as theprincipal outcome measure. These approaches,however, can oversimplify a complex teachingand learning environment and can lead to simplisticand unjustified conclusions. 22Mixed-method approaches, such as thoseemployed in this study, may offer more promisefor understanding the potential effects of artspartnerships. 23 Assessment instruments based onobservations and perceptions of program participantshave more validity than measures drawnfrom other subject disciplines that are onlydistantly related to the instructional content ofarts programming. ■A student artist works with oil pastels at PS 160q.47

Endnotes1 E. L. Thorndike and R. S. Woodworth. 1901. “The influence ofimprovement in our mental functions upon the efficiency ofanother function.” Psychological Review 9: 374–382. R. M.Gagne. 1970. The Conditions of Learning. New York: Holt.2 G. Salomon and D. N. Perkins. 1989. “Rocky roads to transfer:Rethinking mechanisms of a neglected phenomenon.”Educational Psychologist 24(2): 113–142. M. K. Singley and J. R.Anderson. 1989. The Transfer of Cognitive Skill. Cambridge:Harvard University Press.3 E. B. Fiske (Ed.). 1999. Champions of Change: The Impact of Artson Learning. Washington, D.C.: The Arts Education Partnershipand the President’s Committee on the Arts and the Humanities.R. J. Deasy (Ed.). 2002. Critical Links: Learning in the Arts andStudent Academic and Social Development. Washington, D.C.: ArtsEducation Partnership.4 R. Horowitz and J. Webb-Dempsey. 2002. “Promising Signs ofPositive Effects: Lessons from the Multi-Arts Studies.” In R. J.Deasy (Ed.). Critical Links: Learning in the Arts and StudentAcademic and Social Development (pp. 98–100). Washington, D.C.:Arts Education Partnership.5 E. Winner and M. Cooper. 2000. “Mute those claims:No evidence (yet) for a causal link between arts study andacademic achievement.” The Journal of Aesthetic Education34(3–4): 11–75.6 D. K. Detterman and R. J. Sternberg (Eds.). 1993. Transfer onTrial: Intelligence, Cognition, and Instruction. Norwood: Ablex.Horowitz and Webb-Dempsey.7 H. Gardner. 1977. “Senses, Symbols, Operations: AnOrganization of Artistry.” In D. Perkins and B. Leondar (Eds.).The Arts and Cognition. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins UniversityPress. H. Gardner. 1991. The Unschooled Mind: How Children Thinkand How Schools Should Teach. New York: Basic Books.8 J. Burton, R. Horowitz, and H. Abeles. 2000. “Learning inand through the arts: The question of transfer.” Studies in ArtEducation 41(3): 228–257.9 Principal research associates included Elizabeth Beaubrun,Susan Falls, Maggie Fishman, Amy Kleiman, and Dan Serig.10 More details on the methods and results of these researchphases can be found in R. Horowitz and A. Kleiman, “Therelationship between arts learning and cognitive skills, socialcompetencies, and personal dispositions.” Paper presented atthe American Educational Research Association conference inNew Orleans (April 2002).11 A. Kleiman. 2003. “Teachers’, Teaching Artists’, and Students’Perceptions of the Acquisition of New Teaching Skills andStudent Learning within an Elementary School ArtsPartnership.” Unpublished masters thesis, Columbia University.12 Horowitz and Kleiman.13 Horowitz and Kleiman, 8.14 VDP participants included teachers, administrators, artists,and ArtsConnection staff.15 E. Beaubrun. 2003. P.S. 39 case study (draft). Unpublishedreport. S. Falls. 2003. Fifth grade case study at P.S. 130 (draft).Fishman, M. 2003. ArtsConnection at P.S. 130 Case Study(draft). Unpublished report.16 J. P. Guilford. 1967. “Factors that Aid and Hinder Creativity.”In J. C. Gowan, G. D. Demos, and E. P. Torrance (Eds.), Creativity:Its Educational Implications (pp. 106–123). New York: Wiley.17 A t-test indicated that the differences between means werenot statistically significant for these four variables. However, thepositive results shown in the chart are consistent with ouranalysis of qualitative data.18 Teachers also responded to a rating scale, adapted from theTeacher Perception Scale (TPS), measuring their perceptions ofchildren’s imaginations. The scale was developed as part of theLearning In and Through the Arts study.19 A t-test indicated significant differences between means foreach variable in this chart, and for all variables in the charts thatfollow.20 The risk-taking scale is derived from the TPS.21 The author will announce the distribution of researchinstruments at a later date.22 M. Chatterji. 2005. “Evidence on ‘what works’: An argumentfor extended-term mixed-method (ETMM) evaluation designs.”Educational Researcher 34(5): 14–24.23 R. B. Johnson and A. J. Onwueguzie. 2004. “Mixed-methodsresearch: A research paradigm whose time has come.”Educational Researcher 33(7): 14–26.ReferencesBeaubrun, E. 2003. P.S. 39 case study (draft). Unpublishedreport.Burton, J., Horowitz, R., and Abeles, H. 2000. “Learning in andthrough the arts: The question of transfer.” Studies in ArtEducation 41(3): 228–257.Chatterji, M. 2005. “Evidence on ‘what works’: An argument forextended-term mixed-method (ETMM) evaluation designs.”Educational Researcher 34(5): 14–24.Deasy, R. J. (Ed.). 2002. Critical Links: Learning in the Arts andStudent Academic and Social Development. Washington, D.C.: ArtsEducation Partnership.Detterman, D. K. and Sternberg, R. J. (Eds.). 1993. Transfer onTrial: Intelligence, Cognition, and Instruction. Norwood:Ablex.Falls, S. 2003. Fifth grade case study at P.S. 130 (draft).Fishman, M. 2003. ArtsConnection at P.S. 130 Case Study(draft). Unpublished report.Fiske, E. B. (Ed.). 1999. Champions of Change: The Impact of Arts onLearning. Washington, D.C.: The Arts Education Partnershipand the President’s Committee on the Arts and theHumanities.Gagne, R. M. 1970. The Conditions of Learning. New York: Holt.Gardner, H. 1977. “Senses, Symbols, Operations: AnOrganization of Artistry.” In D. Perkins and B. Leondar (Eds.).The Arts and Cognition. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins UniversityPress.Gardner, H. 1991. The Unschooled Mind: How Children Think andHow Schools Should Teach. New York: Basic Books.Guilford, J. P. 1967. “Factors that Aid and Hinder Creativity.” InJ. C. Gowan, G. D. Demos, and E. P. Torrance (Eds.), Creativity:Its Educational Implications (pp. 106–123). New York: Wiley.Horowitz, R. and Webb-Dempsey, J. 2002. “Promising Signs ofPositive Effects: Lessons from the Multi-Arts Studies.” In R. J.Deasy (Ed.). Critical Links: Learning in the Arts and StudentAcademic and Social Development (pp. 98–100). Washington,D.C.: Arts Education Partnership.Horowitz, R. and Kleiman A. 2002 (April). “The relationshipbetween arts learning and cognitive skills, social competencies,and personal dispositions.” Paper presented at the AERAconference, New Orleans, La.Johnson, R. B. and Onwueguzie, A. J. 2004. “Mixed-methodsresearch: A research paradigm whose time has come.”Educational Researcher 33(7):14–26.Kleiman, A. 2003. “Teachers’, Teaching Artists’, and Students’Perceptions of the Acquisition of New Teaching Skills andStudent Learning within an Elementary School ArtsPartnership.” Unpublished masters thesis, Columbia University.Salomon, G. and Perkins, D. N. 1989. “Rocky roads to transfer:Rethinking mechanisms of a neglected phenomenon.”Educational Psychologist 24(2):113–142.Singley, M.K. and Anderson, J.R. 1989. The Transfer ofCognitive Skill. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Thorndike, E.L. and Woodworth, R.S. 1901. “The influence ofimprovement in our mental functions upon the efficiency ofanother function.” Psychological Review 9: 374–382.Winner, E. and Cooper, M. 2000. “Mute those claims: Noevidence (yet) for a causal link between arts study andacademic achievement.” The Journal of Aesthetic Education,34(3–4): 11–75.48

ContributorsSteve Seidel, Ed.D., has been the director ofProject Zero since July 2000 and the director ofthe Arts in Education program at the HarvardGraduate School of Education since July 2004. Dr.Seidel has been active in the areas of arts andeducation for over thirty years. Prior to coming tothe School of Education, he taught theater andcoordinated the arts program at The Group Schoolin Cambridge, Massachusetts, an alternative highschool for working-class youth. He also taught foreight years at South Boston High School as leadteacher in the Theater Company of Boston’sfederally funded collaboration with city publicschools. At Project Zero, Dr. Seidel has beenprincipal investigator on numerous researchprojects, including Arts Survive, The EvidenceProject, Making Learning Visible: Children asIndividual and Group Learners, and TheShakespeare & Company Research Study.Carol Morgan, deputy director for education atArtsConnection since 1998, began her career as aclassroom teacher. Prior to her work withArtsConnection, she was a partner inDevelopment Through Art, Inc., an educationalresearch group that developed arts curricula,conducted research, and implemented programsin Russia and Kazakhstan as well as in schoolsand museums in the United States. She has alsoserved as the assistant and acting director of theDepartment of Education at The Museum ofModern Art; the executive director ofCummington Community of the Arts, an artistcolony; and as a consultant in planning, curriculumdevelopment and evaluation for arts andsocial service organizations. Throughout hercareer, she has made consistent inquiries both intobuilding learning communities and the relationshipbetween theory and practice. Ms. Morgan’spublications include “From Modernist Utopia toCold-War Reality: A Critical Moment in MuseumEducation” in Studies in Modern Art 5 published byThe Museum of Modern Art, and “Victor D’Amicoat MoMA: A Shifting Paradigm in MuseumEducation,” a catalog essay for the exhibitionVictor D’Amico: The Children’s Arts Carnival in Tokyo.Jessica Nicoll, a performer, choreographer, andteacher, graduated from Sarah Lawrence Collegeand has worked since 1981 as an artist in publicschool residencies through ArtsConnection andother arts-in-education organizations. She alsoteaches modern dance, improvisation, andchoreography to students of all levels at the 92ndSt. Y Harkness Dance Center. Ms. Nicoll has guestlectured at her alma mater and other colleges andis a regular presenter at the Dance EducationLaboratory.Since 1990, Ms. Nicoll has designed and led professionaldevelopment workshops throughout thecountry, working with classroom teachers, teachingartists, school administrators, and graduate studentsin dance and general education programs. Herwork addresses such topics as multiple intelligencetheory and the arts; interdisciplinary approaches toteaching the performing arts; arts and literacyconnections; alternative definitions of giftedness;assessment processes in the arts; and choreographyand the young performer.Ms. Nicoll has written curriculum materials forArtsConnection (in dance, music, theater, andvisual arts) and Ballet Hispanico (Teacher StudyGuide, 1993). She was a contributor to JaneRemer’s Beyond Enrichment (1996) and toArtsConnection’s Talent Beyond Words (1993) andNew Horizons (1996) reports to the U.S.Department of Education. Nicoll is the recipientof a 1999 OOBR (Off-Off-Broadway Review)Award for choreography and the 2004 LindaLeRoy Janklow Award for teaching artistry. Herpersonal essays have appeared in American Hikerand Sports Illustrated.Rachel Watts is currently the director of the MarinYouth Center in San Rafael, California. The youthcenter focuses on youth leadership skill buildingthrough the arts, environmental activism, technology,youth mentorships, and community service. Sheworked at ArtsConnection for 7 years, first as aprogram manager, facilitating artist residencies inthe schools. She later took on the role of researchassociate, focusing on identifying facilitation strategiesin varying types of partnerships.49

Susan Cernansky is an educator in the New YorkCity Public School system. She first becameinvolved with ArtsConnection when she was a firstgrade teacher at PS 53. Later, as an instructionalleader for the third grade, she served as a mentorfor teachers to broaden their experiences with thearts residencies provided by ArtsConnection. Ms.Cernansky has worked with The ElementaryTeacher’s Network, co-teaching courses forteachers. She is currently a UFT Teacher CenterStaff/Literacy Coach at PS 36 in the Bronx.Joanna Hefferen, director of professionaldevelopment, joined ArtsConnection in 1998 andoversees the organization’s professional developmentprograms and training sessions for teachersand teaching artists. Prior to her work atArtsConnection, she served as arts-in-educationcoordinator at Henry Street Settlement’s AbronsArts Center. As a teaching artist, she worked withThe Whole Theater Company, with MiddlesexCounty High School for the Performing Arts, andwith the New Jersey State Council on the Arts,where she also served as mentor theater artist. Asa theater specialist with the Boston Public Schools,Ms. Hefferen developed bilingual theater andmedia curricula and provided professionaldevelopment for teachers through the Universityof Massachusetts.Barbara Watanabe Batton is a founder and codirectorof the Elementary Teachers Network (ETN)at the Institute for Literacy Studies (ILS) at LehmanCollege of The City University of New York(CUNY). She has taught in New York City elementaryschools for over thirty years as a classroomteacher and teacher educator. Her specialty areasinclude arts and literacy education and descriptiveinquiry. Since 1999, she has worked withArtsConnection as an evaluator and literacy consultantand co-developed the Video DescriptionProcess (VDP) with ArtsConnection staff at C.E.S.53 in the Bronx. Ms. Batton received an M.A. inEnglish from Lehman College and a B.A. in Englishliterature from Pomona College. She currentlyworks for the ILS as a staff development specialistwith the Project Stars Even Start family literacyprogram at PS 396 in the Bronx.Ms. Batton’s publications include: “The Parent-Teacher Learning Collaborative at CommunityElementary School 53: The Story of a Partnership”in Family Literacy Forum, published by theNational Even Start Association (2003) and“Play and choice in and out of doors” in TheProspect Review. (2001)Rob Horowitz, Ed.D., received his doctoratefrom Teachers College, Columbia University in1994, where he now serves as associate director ofthe Center for Arts Education Research. He is alsoa consultant to arts organizations, schools, schooldistricts, and foundations. As part of a group ofresearchers supported by The GE Fund and TheJohn D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation,Dr. Horowitz investigated the impact of artslearning on several cognitive and socialdimensions, such as creativity, personal expression,and school climate. The collective research,Champions of Change: The Impact of the Arts onLearning, was published by the President’sCommittee on the Arts and Humanities and theArts Education Partnership. He is a recipient ofthe NAEA 2001 Manuel Barkan Memorial Awardfor the article based on this work, “Learning Inand Through the Arts: The Question of Transfer”in Studies in Art Education. Most recently, Dr.Horowitz contributed to Critical Links: Learning inthe Arts and Student Academic and Social Development.Dr. Horowitz has helped develop numerouseducational partnerships throughout the countrythrough lectures, workshops, and writings. He isthe author of From Service Provider to Partnership: AManual for Planning, Developing and ImplementingCollaborations with the New York City Public Schoolsand co-author of Institutionalizing Arts Education forNew York City Public Schools, the blueprint for the$36 million Annenberg arts education initiative.Dr. Horowitz’s current projects include evaluationof arts partnerships, teacher professional development,and research on the impact of arts learningon cognitive and social development.EditorBarbara Rich, Ed.D., a vice president of theDana Foundation, is responsible for the News andInternet Office and helps oversee arts educationat the Foundation. Rich was an editor of Acts ofAchievement: The Role of Performing Arts Centers inEducation. Rich’s background in communicationsand education includes posts at Rutgers Universityand Marymount Manhattan College, where shewas a Dean and then a Vice President. She earneda B.A. from City College of New York and anEd.D. from Teachers’ College, ColumbiaUniversity. Rich has published articles onscience and education and has served often as adiscussant on media and also on arts education.50

AcknowledgementsThe Dana Foundationwould like to acknowledge:Barbara BattonSusan CernanskyTamina DavarJanet EilberJohanna GoldbergJoanna HefferenRob Horowitz, Ed.D.Rebecca LuibTashon McKeithanEdward MillerCarol MorganJane NevinsJessica NicollEve OttavinoPaula PinnockDebra ScharfSteve Seidel, Ed.D.Martha SparksSteven TennenRachel WattsArtsConnectionArtsConnection gratefully acknowledges thesupport received for the research, programmingand resulting symposium described in this publicationfrom a three-year grant from the U.S.Department of Education Arts in Education ModelDevelopment and Dissemination Program, publicfunds from the New York State Council on theArts and the New York City Department ofCultural Affairs, and major gifts from The DanaFoundation, The Arthur M. Blank FamilyFoundation, The Louis Calder Foundation, theEmily Davie and Joseph S. Kornfeld Foundation,the Greentree Foundation and the AmericanExpress Company.ArtsConnection also wishes to thank: theprincipals in the four schools where we workedon this project—Beverly Stern (PS 38), AlexMateo (PS 39), David Vas Nunes (PS 53), andMargarita Nell and Maria Nunziata (PS 130)—and all of the many teachers from whom welearned so much about teaching and learning:Barbara Batton of the Elementary TeachersNetwork, Institute for Literacy Studies, LehmanCollege; Pat Carini and Cecelia Traugh of TheProspect Center, whose work has informed manyaspects of our current work, especially the VideoDescription Process; and Charlotte Doyle, MargeryB. Franklin and Sara Wilford, consultants fromSarah Lawrence College, who facilitated a series ofChild Development Workshops that helped launchour curriculum articulation process.Ann Whitman51

IndexPage numbers in italics followed by a lowercase n referto footnotes.AAbeles, H., 33, 34, 48nAllen, David, 18Amelia Hits the Road (Marissa Moss), 21Artist Institute, 22Artist-to-artist relationshipArt Institute, 22Backward Design, 22, 23, 24mentoring, 23–24Sharing and Deconstruction Process, 22–23study groups, 23Artist-to-organization relationshipassessing artists' teaching, 24–25modeling reflective practice, 24providing support, 24Artist-to-teacher relationship, 22Arts (cognitive, social, personal development)Research Studyarts and literacy connection, 34–35ArtsConnection involvement, 33, 34–35behavior collection study, 33–34case studies, 35–36cognitive and writing variables compared withnumber of residencies (graph), 45collaboration between artists and teachers, 37–38comfort with arts compared with cognitive variables(graph), 46comfort with arts compared with personal variables(graph), 46conclusions and implications, 46–47construction and administration of rating scales, 38contemporary cognitive theory and, 32data aggregation, 36data analysis, 34descriptive study, 33design limitations, 32–33effect of the arts on learning, 32English language arts skills competencies and, 35initial lines of inquiry, 33–35item-development process, 37lack of measurement instruments, 32–33mean scores for student-development variables, 44mean scores for teacher and school variables, 44–45number of coded extracts, 36objective of case studies, 35perceptions of impact study, 34personal variables compared with number ofresidencies (graph), 46principal research associates, 48nprocess variables compared with number ofresidencies (graph), 45purpose of the study, 33qualitative phases of the first four years of research,33–34questions to guide fieldwork, 35–36rating-scale items, 37–44references, 48relationships among variables, 44residency experience and rating scale results, 45–46residency length, 33selection of variables and development of the itempool, 36–38social variables compared with number of residencies(graph), 45standardized tests and, 47student development association with teacher growthand change, 46t-test, 48nteacher and school staff involvement, 33Teacher Perception Scale, 48nteacher support for, 38U.S. Department of Education Model Developmentand Dissemination grant, 34–35Arts Survive: A Study of Sustainability in Arts EducationPartnerships (Steve Seidel, M. Eppel, and M.Martiniello), 4nArtsConnection, 8arrangements with local schools and school districts, 2artist assessment criteria, 24–25artist isolation and, 3Arts (cognitive, social, personal) DevelopmentResearch Study involvement, 33, 34–35connection between teacher learning and studentlearning, 4curriculum-articulation initiative, 9–14facilitation, 3founding of, 6goals, 5lasting effects on students, 1listening, learning, and changing to meet the needsof students, 4original work of, 6outsider perspective, 3–4partnership schools, 3, 5professional development program, 22–26program managers, 24relationship building diagram, 23researchers’ goals, 2social dimension, 2–352

Bstatement of educational philosophy, 7teachers’ learning and, 2U.S. Department of Education curriculum-articulationgrant, 9U.S. Department of Education Model Developmentand Dissemination grant, 34–35Video Description Process, 3, 27–31, 34Backward Design method, 12–14, 22, 23, 24Batton, Barbara Watanabe, 27–31Beaubrun, Elizabeth, 48nBlythe, Tina, 18The Book of Learning and Forgetting (Frank Smith), 27nBrooks, Arthur, 18Bruner, Jerome, 15nBurton, J., 33, 34, 48nCCernansky, Susan, 19–21Child-development seminars, 9–10Child’s Talk (Jerome Bruner), 15nChinese dance residency example, 21Chokshi, Sonal, 12n“Choreographing a Life: Reflections on CurriculumDesign, Consciousness, and Possibility” (Sue Stinson),10nCochran-Smith, Marilyn, 5nCole, Joanna, 21Collaboration between teachers and artists rating-scaleitem, 39Comfort level and knowledge with performing, teaching,or discussing the arts rating-scale item, 43Community Elementary School 53, 3Video Description Process, 27–31Cooperative learning rating-scale item, 40Critical Response Protocol, 13–14Curriculum articulationartists' presentations to the group, 14child-development seminars, 9–10colleague-to-colleague interaction, 11–12curriculum definition, 9deconstruction of the work, 10–11discipline-based meetings, 10–12goal, 9Lesson Study, 12–14questions to consider, 9theater artists' goals, 11values-clarification workshops, 10DDanceChinese dance residency, 21curriculum articulation, 9–14Video Description Process, 27–31Deconstruction of the work, 10–11Degen, Bruce, 21Discipline-based meetings, 10–12Discipline committees, 7Doyle, Charlotte, 9nDuckworth, Eleanor, 10nEEducational philosophyarticulation of, 8challenging assumptions, 7–8challenging school conditions, 5–6choice-making, 8description, 7discipline committees, 7“inquiry-based partnerships,” 6lessons learned, 7–8program staff evaluations, 7staff meetings as professional development, 7supporting inquiry, 6–7systems for working with schools, 5–6Educational philosophy statement, 7Elaboration rating-scale item, 39Elementary Teachers Network, 3“Exploring Writing and Learning Alongside the Arts”course, 30–31Video Description Process, 27–31“Elements of a Quality Arts Learning Experience”(Steve Seidel), 10nEppel, M., 4“Excellence in Teaching” (Dorothy Heathcote), 10n“Exploring Writing and Learning Alongside the Arts”course, 30–31Expression of ideas or feelings rating-scale item, 40FFacilitating partnershipseffective facilitation strategies, 16elements, 16–17facilitator’s role, 15–16professional development for facilitators, 17–18protocols, 18protocols used, 18questions to consider, 16, 17scaffolding a lesson, 15, 15nsuccessful partnerships, 15teachers’ and artists’ understanding and expertiseand, 15The Facilitator’s Book of Questions: Tools for LookingTogether at Student and Teacher Work(David Allen and Tina Blythe), 18Falls, Susan, 48nFernandez, Clea, 12nFishman, Maggie, 48nFranklin, Margery, 9n53

GGallimore, Ronald, 8n, 26n, 31nGifts of the Muse: Reframing the Debate about the Benefitsof the Arts (Kevin McCarthy, Elizabeth Ondaatje,Laura Zakaras, and Arthur Brooks), 18Greene, Maxine, 24, 24nH‘The Having of Wonderful Ideas” and Other Essayson Teaching and Learning (Eleanor Duckworth), 10nHawkins, Frances, 10nHeathcote, Dorothy, 10nHefferen, Joanna, 22–26Hiebert, James, 8n, 26n, 31nHorowitz, Ron, 32–47, 33, 34, 48nHyperResearch 2.0 software, 34IInquiry-based partnershipsbuilding staff capacity, 7commitments from arts organizations, 6conditions required for, 6practices that can be adapted to any situation, 7supporting inquiry, 6–7Inside/Outside: Teacher Research and Knowledge(Marilyn Cochran-Smith and Susan L. Lytle), 5nKKleiman, Amy, 34, 48n“A Knowledge Base for the Teaching Profession:What Would It Look Like and How Can We GetOne?” (James Hiebert, Ronald Gallimore, andJames W. Stigler), 8n, 26n, 31nL“Learning in and through the arts: The question oftransfer” (J. Burton, R. Horowitz, and H. Abeles),33, 48nLerman, Liz, 13–14, 13nLesson StudyCritical Response Protocol with Liz Lerman, 13–14description, 12preliminary plan and, 13refining curricula, 14sample of charting a lesson, 12staff use of, 14steps, 13videotaping of lessons, 13Literacyarts and literacy connection, 30–31, 34–35The Logic of Action: Young Children at Work(Frances Hawkins), 10nLytle, Susan L, 5nMThe Magic Schoolbus (Joanna Cole and Bruce Degen), 21Manny, student’s personal experience, 15Martiniello, M., 4May, Wanda, 10nMcCarthy, Kevin, 18McKeithan, Tashon, 15, 19–21McTigue, Jay, 10n, 12, 20, 23Mentoring, 23–24Morgan, Carol, 5–8Moss, Marissa, 21Motivation rating-scale item, 38, 41NNew or better relationships with students rating-scaleitem, 40New York City Alliance for Teaching Artistand Staff Developmentformation and objectives of, 25Nicoll, Jessica, 9–14OOndaatje, Elizabeth, 18Organization-to-organization relationship, 25Ottavino, Eve, 19–21Ownership of learning rating-scale item, 42PPinnock, Paula, 19–21“A Practical Guide to Translating Lesson StudyFor a U.S. Setting” (Clea Fernandez andSonal Chokshi), 12nProfessional developmentartist assessment criteria, 24–25artist-to-artist relationship, 22–24artist-to-organization relationship, 24–25artist-to-teacher relationship, 22creation of shared knowledge, 26for facilitators, 17–18framework of relationship building, 22, 23goal, 22influence on the field of arts education, 25–26mentoring, 23–24organization-to-organization relationship, 25program managers and, 24relational framework worksheet, 24staff meetings and, 7study groups, 23Prospect descriptive process, Prospect School,Vermont, 2754

R“The relationship between arts learning and cognitiveskills, social competencies, and personal dispositions”(R. Horowitz and A. Kleiman), 48nSScaffolding definition, 15nScharf, Debra, 19–21School climate rating-scale item, 44School leadership rating-scale item, 44Seeing students in a new light or from a differentperspective rating-scale item, 43Seidel, Steve, 1–4, 10n, 17nSelf-confidence rating-scale item, 41Serig, Dan, 48nShahn, Ben, 10nThe Shape of Content (Ben Shahn), 10nSharing and Deconstruction Process, 10–11, 22–23Smith, Frank, 27Sopyla, Ron, 15Special-education classdance residency, 27–31Staff evaluations, 7Stigler, James W., 8n, 26n, 31nStinson, Sue, 10nStudy groups, 23TTeacher buy-in rating-scale item, 42Teacher Perception Scale, 48n“Teachers’, Teaching Artists’, and Students’ Perceptionsof the Acquisition of New Teaching Skills andStudent Learning within an Elementary SchoolArts Partnership” (A. Kleiman), 48n“Teachers as Curriculum Developers” (Wanda May), 10nTeacher’s guidefor administrators, 20for artists, 20–21Chinese dance residency example, 21for teachers, 19–20The Teaching Gap (James W. Stigler andJames Hiebert), 26nTheaterartists’ goals, 11curriculum articulation, 9–14Tips from teachersfor administrators, 20for artists, 20–21for teachers, 19–20“Toward a Process for Critical Response”(Liz Lerman), 13n24 Hours: An Evidence Process for Improving Teachingand Learning (Steve Seidel), 17nUUnderstanding by Design (Grant Wiggens andJay McTigue), 10n, 12, 20, 23U.S. Department of Educationcurriculum-articulation grant, 9Model Development and Dissemination grant, 34VValues-clarification workshops, 10Video Description Processarts and literacy connection, 30–31class demographics, 27–28description, 34final meeting, 30focusing question, 28–29goals, 27one teacher's perspective of, 31participants, 48n“process talks,” 30Prospect descriptive process and, 27structure of, 28student progress, 29–30tentative findings, 31WWatts, Rachel, 15–18Wiggens, Grant, 10n, 12, 20, 23Wilford, Sarah, 9nWorksheetprofessional development relational frameworkworksheet, 24Writing process rating-scale item, 38, 42ZZakaras, Laura, 1855

Notes56

THEDANAFOUNDATIONPartnering Arts Education: AWorking Model fromArtsConnection is posted in its entirety in PDFformat on the Dana Web site: www.dana.org.Information about ordering additional copies isavailable on the Web site.DESIGN: QUADRANT COMMUNICATIONS CO., INC., NEW YORK, NYPRINTING: GRAPHIC MANAGEMENT PARTNERS, PORT CHESTER, NY

THEDANAFOUNDATION745 Fifth Avenue, Suite 900New York, NY 10151