Creativity

in Digital Art Education Teaching Practices

J O A N N A BLACK AND KATHY BROWNING

S
ince the introduction of personal computers, art educators increasingly have adopted
new digital technologies into their pedagogy, yet overall that adoption has been a slow
process (Black, 2002; Browning, 2006; Degennaro & Mak, 2002-2003; Flood & Bamford,
2007; Gude, 2007; Leonard & Leonard 2006; Lu, 2005; Mayo, 2007). Many teachers remain still
infrequent users of technology or avoid using new learning technologies in art classrooms
(Degennaro & Mak, 2002-2003; Gregory, 2009). Why is this the case?

Diane Gregory (2009), who has written extensively about In an ideal world, administrators and policy makers can address
technology in art education, perceives that technology usage has such difficulties through writing and implementing supportive art
decreased in the last decade as art educators contend with restric- education policies, providing better teacher training and support,
tive, non-supportive art education policies as a result of the No decreasing teachers' stress, granting more time to learn about
Child Left Behind Act. Robert Sabol (2010) recently wrote a critique technology usage, lessening teaching loads, and supplying more
regarding the effects of this act on the field of art education. He resources to purchase software and hardware. During the current
presented recent findings of a 21% decrease in funding and a 19% recession, however, we may not see this occur. Nevertheless, there
decrease in instruction time for art education, which substantiates are ways in which teachers can address these problems in order to
Gregory's observations (2010). Additional key factors contributing to effectively integrate technology into the art curriculum. It is recom-
art teachers' reluctance to apply technology to their teaching include mended that they find technology mentors within their schools and
software difficulties, increasing stress, heavier teaching loads, time establish creative, student-centered classrooms in which co-learning
constraints, shortage of hardware and software, and lack of teacher and collaborative learning takes place between teachers and students
support and training (Black, 2002, Browning, 2006; Delacruz, 2004, on an ongoing basis (Black, 2002, 2006, 2009a; Browning, 2006;
2009a, 2009b; Gregory, 2009). Gregory, 2009; Krug, 2004). To integrate technologies, art teachers

above
Figure 1. Vanessa Pavkovic, Genet/coWy/Mod/fiec/.
Apple Greatly image published with permission.
September 2 0 1 1 / A R T EDUCATION 19
 can plan well, and learn about, use, and immerse themselves in new and impede the creative process (Degennaro & Mak, 2002-2003).
technologies and networking sites. This requires planning, strat- Even when art teachers employ technology within their classrooms,
egizing, and restructuring. For some teachers, it requires using new it is alarming that many use it in ways that do not foster the creative
pedagogical methods (Gregory, 2009). process (Cuban, 2001; Delacruz, 2004; Flood & Bamford, 2007;
Jackson, 1999; Taylor, 2007). Gregory (2009) observed the lack of
Why not just carry on with traditional methods of teaching and
creativity in regard to art teachers' approaches to technology usage:
learning—with what is tried and true? Why is using technology in
our art classrooms so important? Perhaps the answer harkens back, to ... art teachers typically use established computer technolo-
use Bob Dylan's phrase, to the fact that "The times they are a changin' " gies as teaching or presentation tools rather than facilitating
(1964). Today's students, called "screenagers" by some, are indeed student's creative production and thinking, collaborative
different than even a decade ago (Taylor, 2007), immersing them- learning, problenn-solving and higher order learning... [Yet
selves in interactive technologies, becoming creators of digital new art] teachers have the capacity for creative thinking, problem
media, and socially collaborating on a scale that we have not seen solving, and risk taking... (p. 48)
before (Jenkins, 2009; Tapscott, 2009; Taylor, 2007, Wesch, 2007).
Along with our students, our world has changed. Art educators like In this article, we postulate that using digital technologies in the
Duncum (2004) argue for a visual culture paradigm reflective of our 21st-century classrooms does not impede creativity, but instead
multimodal "Digital Age." Jagodzinski (2009) argues: allows and encourages users to access their creative selves. Crucial
to this is the implementation of critical educational strategies and
Installation, video, performance art, screen experinnenta- interventions that promote student innovation. The way in which
tions "beyond" cinema, and especially the digitalization of art educators use and integrate technologies into the classroom is
the image all indicate the significance of the inhuman within crucial to stimulating students' learning, their imaginations, and the
the processes of creation where signifier and image are in a creative process. Researchers have indicated that we require a greater
disjunctive synthesis. It's time that art educators, who earned number of descriptive studies to promote understanding of successful
their reputations within the bounds of modernist studio prac- pedagogical strategies that cultivate higher learning, divergent
tices and pre-computer era begin to face the changed land- thought processes, and intellectual inventiveness (Browning, 2006;
scape; their time has past (p. 27) Jewitt, 2008; Taylor, 2007). In this article, we discuss creativity in
visual arts, followed by a description of our research with preservice
Art educators cannot ignore these emerging modes of literacy and in-service teachers in which we have strived to promote teachers'
(Duncum, 2004; Flood & Bamford, 2007; Stankiewicz, 2004). If we creativity so they will, in turn, use these approaches in their early,
keep along our current path of poorly integrating technology into middle, and secondary visual art classrooms.
art classrooms, it is to the detriment of our students. Not embracing
technologies within our classrooms can create schisms between our Creativity
schools and the lived experiences of our youth (Black & Smith, 2006; "Creativity involves invention, discovery, curiosity, imagination,
Boughton, 2005). Not embracing digital technologies can also create experimentation and exploration. During the creative digital process
schisms between art educators, who have been slow to embrace tech- there is a transformation from something known to something
nologies, and the art world that has been quick to promote, integrate, not previously known" (Browning, 2008a, p. 213). In digital arts,
and exhibit current artists' digital works. Consequently, teachers who this involves more than simply learning new software. Crucial to
ignore new technologies are providing inadequate student prepara- this process is the understanding that, through the act of creation,
tion for the current art world (Jackson, 1999). Moreover, working in students express themselves. Just as in traditional arts, in the digital
new media develops students' problem-solving skills, visual reasoning arts "Creativity requires this leap from the known to alternatives but
skills, and creative thought exploration and expression (Flood & to make it fully the individual must be able to hypothesize, imagine
Bamford, 2007). and appreciate the significance of one's transformational activity"
Further contributing to the aversion to integrating technologies is (Pickard, 1990, p. 7). An independent, enquiring mind can be devel-
the argument that computers create antiseptic milieu, are mechanical. oped when one develops creative digital understanding.

left: Lisa LeClair, t\/listy. Image published with permission.

center: Eva Park. ./u/yS/rd. Triangle image published with permission.
right: Sarah Wandziak, Sea Storm. Triangle image published with permission.

20 ART EDUCATION / September 2011

 An important approach to teaching digital arts is recognizing that Kathy Browning:
students need not comprehend all that there is to know about the
software. Rather, students can learn the software through the act of Preservice Digital Art Education
creating. Technology, however, should not be the most important part All areas of the modern teaching curriculum, including visual
ot the learning process; rather, the artmaking process is key. To this arts, have an increasing demand to integrate digital technologies.
end, students can be encouraged to manipulate and play with digital The authors of The Ontario Curriculum, Grades 1-8: The Arts (2009)
objects and ideas. Psychologist Carl Rogers (1962) describes a condi- suggest that teachers include digital applications in their visual arts
tion of creativity to be curriculum. The problem is that there is no concrete instruction;
the ability to play spontaneously with ideas, colours, shapes, the authors of the guideline do not state what technology to use or
relationships—to juggle elements into impossible juxtaposi- how teachers are supposed to accomplish the integration of tech-
tions, to shape wild hypotheses, to make the given problem- nologies. For this reason, visual art educators have to be drivers for
atic, to express the ridiculous, to translate from one form to new technologies in their schools to make it happen (Dunn, 1996).
Teachers need to be motivated and prepared to use digital technolo-
another, to transform into improbable equivalents, (p. 68)
gies creatively.
Students can develop an appreciation and tolerance for ambiguity.
When learning to create and express their ideas with new software, Despite the importance of using digital technologies, many
they can improve their patience and appreciate the subtle and teachers are not prepared to integrate digital applications in art
larger changes that they learn with graphic effects tools. It takes a education. As Greb (1977) realizes.
while to learn new software. By completing creative digital assign- All teachers tend to teach as they have been taught, and clearly
ments, students can become skilled at the effects tools while gaining few, if any, have been taught to use new technologies as either
knowledge of ways in which to use the technology creatively. They art media or teaching tools. Yet few courses are available to
can combine their past experiences with new ideas, and express increase teachers'familiarity and, therefore, comfort level with
themselves while learning new software (Hansen, 1962). Through the
computers. And many art teachers who do use technology are
process of digital creation, students can build up their self-esteem and
self-taught, (p.l4)
may approach digital art education assignments more confidently.
Many others share Greb's views: research and development of
Teachers do not have to know everything about the software; they digital visual arts in teacher preparation courses are badly needed
need only be willing to take a creative approach to technology and (Assey, 1999; Browning, 2006; Coufal & Grandgenett, 1997; Delacruz,
learn from their students. If the perspective of the visual arts teacher 2004; Heise & Grandgenett, 1996; Lebo, 1992; Orr, 2004; Rogers,
is "pro-tech" (meaning that they put the technology first), then 1999).
students may complete mechanical assignments that do not creatively
express the self. Most importantly, the creative individual should Further, a big gap exists between knowing basic computer skills
drive technology, and as students creatively explore art assignments and using computers for art education. Most of today's students in art
they may learn not only the software, but also express themselves education are familiar with the computer; however, as Maddux (2003)
creatively. observes, "We know that teachers believe they do not have sufficient
technical or pedagogical support to help them integrate informa-
Digital realizing can be an abrupt understanding. When using tion technology into their teaching" (p. 45). While there are more
new software, students have technical insights which allow them to courses today to improve preservice teachers' ability to use tech-
make sense of concepts that have resisted traditional understanding. nology, digital visual arts are not taught sufficiently to help students
Superimposition, or compositing while juxtaposing ideas, develops engage technology creatively. Without formal training, preservice art
postmodern, metaphorical thinking which helps when solving education teachers must try to find time to get to know software and
stubborn problems, and can also be encouraged in art educa- develop lessons for classrooms on their own. It is the creative use of
tion classrooms. Teachers need to allow students the freedom to technology that is missing. As Assey (1999) argues, "Arts specialists
experiment with software and, when something does not work, try not only need continued training in basic computer skills, they need
something else. They can spend more time digitally exploring, rather professional development in specific hardware and software related to
than just completing assignments. "When creating, one tends to improving the learning experience in each of the arts disciplines" (p.
strive toward something that will become increasingly specified and 13). The creative use of technology in visual arts affects the activities
realized" (Browning, 2008a, p. 213). Children can be encouraged to of what teachers can do with their students, including the types of
look at images and text from a variety of perspectives. Teachers and assignments developed. Despite some recent studies (Black, 2009b,
students are active participants in the teacher/learner environment, Browning, 2006, 2011; Carpenter & Taylor, 2007; Delacruz, 2004)
and both have to be willing to take risks, which is an important aspect of digital applications in visual arts in different Canadian provinces,
of any creative activity. Students can learn to choose and develop there remains a paucity of theoretical research of digital applications
their sense of "digital wonder" while problem solving and creating art in visual arts in schools.
(Delacruz, 2009a).
My study entitled Digital Applications in Elementary Visual Arts:
Similar to traditional art, teachers can shape assignments that A Case Study in Ontario and Newfoundland Schools (Browning,
are open-ended and that encourage problem-solving and student 2006) focused on six generalist elementary teachers who use creative
self-expression (Black, 2009a, 2009b; Browning, 2006, 2011; Gregory, digital software applications in their visual arts classes. These teachers
2009). Students may ask, "What do I want to do in the digital art were from two different school boards in Southern Ontario and
assignment, and how can I go about achieving it?" In the following Newfoundland. In Digital Applications in Intermediate/Senior Visual
section, we describe our experiences working with art educators to Arts Education (Browning, 2011), six teachers in one school district
foster creativity in digital visual arts programs. in Newfoundland (three intermediate and three senior visual arts

September 2011/ART EDUCATION 21

 [Teachers] found it helpful to introduce
elements and principles of design with
a focus on basic shapes, relationship
of text to image, cut and paste, and
digital photography. What seemed to
be wanting in these lessons was the
inclusion of process colour theory,
masks, re-sizing, and a more thorough
knowledge of elements and principles
of design (including balance, positive
and negative space, and unity), possibly
because the teachers lacked training
in visual arts and/or the creative use
of digital applications. Inclusion of
these aspects would support the shift
from modernism to postmodernism in
schools, particularly the relationship
of image to text, superimposition, and
multiple ways of viewing and knowing.
(Browning, 2006, p. 38)
As a creative artist (Browning, 20D8b, 2009;
Kd liier I ne Gredveb, hiying Htyh in tiie Sky. Cut & Paste image publiai leU
^'""' Nisenholt, 2007) and art educator, I know
from practice and research the importance of
having a creative approach to technology as
it encourages multiple perspectives. Students in my digital visual-
arts classes are transformed creatively while learning new software
applications and completing their arts assignments. Through the
continual process of experimenting and playing with digital effects
tools, creative digital art is fostered. By creating digital art, these
students become self-motivated and self-directed, while gaining
confidence in their digital creative ability and themselves as
teachers. Knowledge can be grounded in creative digital applica-
tions. As Grabove (1997) stated: "As self-confidence grows, so does
the ability to function as self-motivated, self-directed learner" (p.
94). Students in preservice Bachelor of Education courses need to be
self-directed learners in order to learn the software while expressing
their creative selves. This is a transformative process for these
students; as the students feel more comfortable and creative with the
software, they become more self-confident.
Students are often intimidated by technology; nevertheless,
through creative play they are able to express their ideas while using
S. ;orf. Wave Runner. Cut & Paste ¡mage published with permission. new software. Zimmerman (1994) addressed similar issues of reflec-
tion leading to transformation in preservice art education students
and the relationship to self-confidence. Informed by my research in
teachers) were interviewed. I also observed classes of all inter-
digital photography and art education and my creative approach to
viewees in both studies. The testimony of the teachers in these
technology, students in my digital visual-arts classes engage their
studies points to the important role of creative digital applications in
creativity while learning new software applications and completing
visual arts and the importance of teacher training: "Teacher training
their digital visual arts assignments (examples of students' digital
and technical support in visual arts and digital applications, the type
visual-arts assignments are included in this article). Through the
of software used, the attitudes and resourcefulness of teachers, and
continual process of experimenting and playing with digital effects
the support offered by the principal and school play key roles in the
tools, creative digital art is fostered. Students can acquire a creative
teaching and learning of digital applications in elementary visual
knowledge base of digital software applications within a visual arts
arts" (Browning, 2006). When students learn to express themselves
curriculum. Professors of art education courses at the university
creatively, they create art rather than just completing an exercise
level can prepare student teachers to teach the traditional methods
for the sake of the assignment. The technological basics can be
of visual arts curriculum development, as well as digital visual
taught alongside with artistic theories and principles; when working
arts applications, by exposing students to technologies as tools of
together, they provide the students with what they need to engage
creativity.
their creativity:

22 ART EDUCATION / September 2011

Joanna Black:
In-Service Digital Art Education
Between 2006 and 2009 I carried out a longitudinal action
research study involving in-service teacher training in digital visual
arts across the early, middle, and high school levels in a school
board located in a central Canadian prairie province. During this
time, I examined ways in which teacher training can effectively
teach art educators about digital arts. Most university and school
board budgets cannot support full-time art and technology consul- Grade 8 student working
tants, underlining the imperative that art educators learn on their on community project.
own how to maximize the technology they have in their classrooms.
However, there is a rising expectation that visual art educators train
their students in digital arts. This was certainly the case within this
school board, which had purchased a large number of computers
and compatible software. Thus, there was a pressing need within this
board to provide training to in-service teachers with little computer
experience in this area.

Involved in this study were six schools, three board administra-

tors in visual arts and technology education, six teachers, and close
to 500 students. Objectives included examining teachers' processes
of learning about digital visual art through ongoing workshops, the
practical difficulties encountered, and the successes they experi-
enced. Teachers and students were involved in the research process,
and a cyclical process was employed (Denzin 8c Lincoln, 2000).
Typical of the interpretive action research model, I used a repeti-
tive cycle that included researching, observing, reflecting, acting,
evaluating, and modifying to research once again over the three-
year period (McNiff & Whitehead, 2006). The research was a social,
participatory, dialectical process in which those involved collabo-
rated to improve the process of teaching and learning through an
ongoing analysis of the workshops and classroom pedagogy. By the
end of the study, I found the effectiveness of in-service workshops
for teachers and their students were contingent upon fostering
the creative process in digital arts education. In short, developing
students' creativity was key to the digital art process.

Each year I conducted the research, I worked with the visual arts
consultant at the school board to launch a common theme in the
schools. Workshops for teachers focused on ways in which to use
the technology in relation to this theme. For the first year, the theme
was "DigiClosets," wherein students were asked to draw their own
bedroom closets complete with contents. Then, working with the
software, they animated their closets, giving the sense of motion.
During the second year (2007-2008), the project was rede- Frier)dship. Created by grade 7 student working on community
signed. First, it was based on a broader theme entitled "Capturing project. Used with permission of the student artist.
Capricious Communities." An open-ended description was given to
educators, allowing for diverse interpretations. Students used multi-
modal educational approaches including traditional, integrated, and
digital texts. As a result, each teacher developed the theme differ-
ently: In the elementary grades, the teacher focused on environ-
mental community concerns; in middle-school grades, teachers
focused on their school communities; and in high school-grades,
the teacher focused on the vibrant community in which they live.
Second, the project was redesigned so that technology was not
the driving force; rather, teachers were told to use any computer
technology that was available and useful to this project. They were
asked what software they wished to use as a focus for the in-service
workshops. Participants decided that they wanted video and
photography training. Also, unlike the previous year, the workshops
had a broader focus. Rather than focus on learning technology. Our City, image by grade 11 students using digital photographs and video.
Used with permission of the student artists.

September 2011 / ART EDUCATION 23

 Image of Self: Art Installation. Created by grade 8 student Recollections of Travel. Image by grade 8 student using photographic digital compositing.
based on theme of memory. Used with permission of the Used with permission of the student artist.
student artist.

the curriculum also discussed current new media artists, such as Overall, participants stated that the second and third years of the
Canadian artists John Hartman and Don Gill and their work on project were a success. Reasons for this were that teachers could
community themes. Another part of the workshop centered upon interpret the broad themes easily, and these themes offered flexibility
Olivia Gude's theories of postmodern art (2007). We discussed Gude's through innovative, broad, project-centered, and problem-based
notions of principles of possibility, including playing, formation of curricula. Other research I have done corroborates these research
self, deconstructing culture, and reconstructing and constructing findings. In my study of model Canadian secondary schools (Black,
social spaces. A final part of the workshop was open discussion on 2009b), I found that art educators not only thrived when they focused
a variety of topics of interest to teachers. One focus was on ways on creative art ideas and not technology driving the curricula, but
traditional arts could merge effectively with digital arts. they also flourished when given freedom to shape creative digital arts
programs. In previous studies (Black, 2009a), I found that new-media
For the final year, participants did not want the approach to programs thrive when educators are given autonomy. Lastly, in the
in-service training altered. The only change was the theme, which action research study, students learned the technology based on what
became "Memories in Motion." Like the year before, the theme was required to creatively develop their art project, so traditional
was broad, the technology was readily available in schools, and the and digital arts flowed together in meaningful ways. In previous
training was based on educators' interests. The foci during workshops case study research about new media, I found traditional visual
were not only on teaching software, but also on current contemporary arts are instrumental and a foundation at the core of the digital art
new-media artists who work with notions of memory, such as Jason process (Black, Davidson, & Mullen, 2007; Black 2009a; Browning,
Dee and Shaun Wilson. Gude's theories were again discussed, and 2006). Similar to traditional visual arts, the ability to self-express in
virtual visits were made to galleries and museums online. Concepts innovative ways is crucial to successful digital arts pedagogy.
of memory presented to teachers included the personal, societal,
collective, and individualized. Teachers decided to deal with the ideas
about memory in diverse ways, ranging from students' personal to {continued on page 33)
school collective memories.

24 ART EDUCATION / September 2011

Creativity in Digital Art Education
continued from page 24

Figure 13. Digital Quilt Community Project: working with still and moving imagery. Figure 14. Personal Explüralions of our Community. Image
Image by grade 8 students using photographic digital compositing. Used with by grade 8 student using digital photography. Used with
permission of Collin Zipp, the artist working with the students. permission of the student artist.

Conclusion
We found major obstacles in the effective delivery of digital art for Joanna Black is Associate Professor of Art Education in the Faculty of
preservice and in-service training within schools. First, consistent Education and Associate Professor in the School of Art at the
with two art education researchers (Gouzouasis, 2001; Jackson, 1999), University of Manitoba. E-mail: blackj@cc.umanitoba.ca
it was found that technology should not "drive" the preservice and
Kathy Browning is Assistant Professor, Visual Arts, School of
in-service training; rather, teachers should begin with compelling,
Education, Laurentian University. E-mail: kbrowning@laurentian.ca
imaginative, and conceptual ideas. The results indicate that what led
to success was the overall pedagogical approach. It is recommended
that technology play a secondary role to creative pedagogy enabling AUTHOR NOTES
the concepts of teaching and learning to drive the art education Joanna Black would like to thank the Imperial Oil Academy for the Learning of
curriculum. Students achieved success when they learned the Mathematics, Science and Technology and the UM/SSHRC Research Grants
Program (UM/SSHRC RGP) at the University of Manitoba for their support of her
technology specifically to enable them to develop their artistic
research.
projects in creative, diverse ways. Second, we conclude that allowing
Kathy Browning would like to thank the Faculty of Education, Memorial University
autonomy for teachers to creatively shape their curricula in the area
of Newfoundland for their support of her 2006 research and her 2011 manuscript in
of new media leads to greater pedagogical success in virtual class- preparation research.
rooms. Finally, we believe that traditional visual arts provide the
foundation for digital arts. Like traditional visual arts, fostering
sttidents' creativity is crucial in our digital art classrooms of today.
Technology does not stifle creativity or students' imaginations;
rather, we conclude that art educators can provide students with
21st-century teaching, using their students' multimodal "digiworlds,"
through the teaching of traditional art as the foundation for digital
art, and by allowing teachers autonomy to develop effective
pedagogical approaches.

September 2011 /ART EDUCATION 33

 REFERENCES
Assey, J. (1999). The future of Browning, K. (2009). Kathy Brownings Greb, D. (1997). New technologies in Maddux, C. (2003). Twenty years of
technology in K-12 arts education. digital photography profiled. In J. the classroom. In D. C. Gregory research in information technology
Forum on Technology in Education. Butler (Ed), The Willisville (Ed.), New technologies in art in education: Assessing our
Washington, DC. Mountain Project (pp. 40-41). education: Implications for theory, progress. Computers in Schools,
Black, I. (2002). Topsy-turvy Willisville, ON: Willisville research, and practice (pp. 13-21). 20(1/2), 35-48.
teacher-student relationships: An Mountain Project Collective. Reston, VA: National Art Education Mayo, S. (2007, May). Implications for
examination of digital multimedia Browning, K. (2011). Digital Association. art education in the third
teaching and learning. Dissertation applications in intermediate/senior Gregory, D. (2009). Boxes with fire: millennium: Art technology
Abstracts International, 63,6. visual arts education. Manuscript in Wisely integrating learning integration. Art Education, 60(3),
Black, I. (2006). Displacing student- preparation. technologies into the art classroom. 45-51.
teacher equilibrium in virtual Carpenter, S. B., & Taylor, P G. (2007). Art Education, 62(3), 47-54. McNiff, J., & Whitehead, J. (2006). All
learning environments. In J. Weiss, Mediating art education: Digital Gouzouasis, P. (2001). The role of the you need to know about action
J. Nolan, & P. Trifonas (Eds.), The kids, art, and technology. Visual arts in new media and Canadian research. London, UK: Sage
international handbook of virtual Arts Research, 65, 84-95. education for the 21st century. Publications.
learning environments. Vol. 1 (pp. Coufal, K., & Grandgenett, N. E (1997). Education Canada, 41(2), 20-23. Nisenholt, M. (2007). Picturing
497-524). USA: Kluwer Academic The community discovered: The Gude, O. (2007). Principles of paradox. Profiling artist Kathy
Publishers. search for meaning. Omaha, NE: possibility: Considerations for a Browning's art: Images on icebergs
Black, I., & Smith, K. (2006). Digital Westside Community Schools. 21st-century art & culture and art educator including digital
retlections: A late January Cuban, L (2001). Oversold and curriculum. Art Education, 60(1), photography student exemplars.
cyberChat about "our gallery of the underused: Computers in the 6-17. Canadian Art Teacher, 6( 1 ).
poetic moving image." In P. classroom. Cambridge, MA: Hansen, H. L. (1962). The course in Ontario Ministry of Education and
Duncum (Ed.), Visual culture in the Harvard University Press. creative marketing strategy at Training. (2009). The Ontario
art class: Case studies (pp. 160-171). Harvard Business School. In J. S. curriculum: The arts. Grades 1 -8:
Degennaro, A., & Mak, B. (2002-2003).
Reston, VA: National Art Education Pames & H. E Harding (Eds.), A The arts. Toronto: Author.
A diffusion model for computer art
Association. sourcebook for creative thinking (pp.
in education. Journal of Educational Orr, P. (2004). Technology and Art
Black, I., Davidson, M., & Mullen, C. Technology Systems, 31(1), 5-18. 325-333). New York, NY: Charles Education: What do we really know
(2007). Turning the clock "back to Scribner's Sons. about it? NAEA Advisory, Spring
Delacruz, E. (2004). Teachers' working
the future:" Some new media conditions and the unmet promise Heise, D., & Grandgenett, N. R (1996). 2004.
approaches to art education. of technology. Studies in Art Perspectives on the use of Internet Pickard, E. (1990). Toward a theory of
Canadian Art Teacher, 6(1), 26-42. Education, 46{\), 6-19. in art classroom. Art Education, creative potential. Journal of
Black, |. (2009a). Necessity is the Delacruz, E. (2009a). Art education 49(6), 13-18. Creative Behavior, 24(1), 1-9.
mother of invention: Changing aims in the age of new media: Jackson, T. A. (1999). Ontological shifts Rogers, C. (1962). Toward a theory of
power dynamics between teachers Moving toward global civil society. in studio art education: Emergent creativity In J. S. Parnés & H. F.
and students in wired art Art Education, 62(5), 13-17. pedagogical models. Art Journal, Harding (Eds.), A sourcebook for
classrooms. Canadian Review of Art 58(0,68-73.
Delacruz, E. (2009b). From bricks and creative thinking (pp. 63-73). New
Education, 36,99-117.
mortar to the public sphere in Jagodzinski, J. (2009). Remember just: York, NY: Charles Scribner's Sons.
Black, I. (2009b). Case study research: cyberspace: Creating a culture of "Art you 'there' wherever 'you' are?" Rogers, P L. (1999). Barriers to
Three model visual arts new media caring on the digital global Canadian Art Teacher, S(l), 26-34. adopting emerging technologies in
programs in Canadian secondary commons. International Journal of Jenkins, H. (2009). Confronting the education. Richmond, VA: Virginia
schools, ¡ournal on Education, Education in the Arts, IO{5). challenges of participatory culture: Commonwealth University.
Informatics and Cybernetics, 1(3), Retrieved from www.ijea.org/ Media education for the 21st Sabol, R.F. (2010). Summary of findings
1-6. vlOn5/vlOn5.pdf Century. Cambridge, MA: MIT from NCLB: A study of its impact
Boughton, D. (2005). From fine art to Denzin, L., & Lincoln, Y. (2000). Press. upon art education programs.
visual culture: Assessment and the Handbook of qualitative research. (Research Report Summary).
Jewitt, C. (2008). Multimodality and
changing role of art education. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Retrieved from www.arteducators,
literacy in school classrooms.
International Journal of Education Publications. org/research/nclb
Review of Research in Education, 32,
through Art, 1(3)211-222.
Duncum, P (2004). Visual culture isn't 241-267. Stankiewicz, M. (2004). Commentary:
Browning, K. (2006). Digital just visual: Multiliteracy, multi- Krug, D. (2004). Editorial: Leadership Notions of technology and visual
applications in elementary visual modality and meaning. Studies in and research: Reimagining literacy. Studies in Art Education,
arts: A case study in Ontario and Art Education, 45(3), 252-264. electronic technologies for 46(0,88-91.
Newfoundland schools. Canadian
Dunn, P 1996). More integrated supporting learning through the Tapscott, D. (2009). Grown up digital:
Review of Art Education, 33(1),
interactive technology and art visual arts. Studies in Art Education. How the Net Generation is changing
25-41.
education. Art Education, 49(6), 46(1), 3-5. your world. New York, NY:
Browning, K. (2008a). Art as 6-n. Lebo, M. (1992). An examination of McGraw-Hill Books.
transformation. In M. Gardner & technology in the art classroom:
Dylan, B. (1964). The times they are Taylor, P (2007). Mediating art
U. Kelly (Eds.), Narrating An annotated bibliography.
a-changin'. (Title track.) IRecord). education; Digital kids, art and
transformative learning in education (Unpublished doctoral dissertation,
New York, NY: Columbia Records. technology. Visual Arts Research,
(pp. 211-221). New York, NY: Indiana University).
Flood, A., & Bamford, A. (2007). 22(65), 84-95.
Palgrave Macmilllan.
Manipulation, simulation, Leonard, L., & Leonard, P (2006, Wesch, M. (Writer and Producer).
Browning, K. (2008b). Kathy
stimulation: The role of art Winter). Leadership for technology (2007). The machine is us/ing us
Brownings digital photography
education in the digital age. integration: Computing the reality. [Video]. Available from www.
profiled. In F. Blaikie (Ed.),
International Journal of Education The Alberta Journal of Educational youtube.com/
Canadian art/works: A resource for
through Art, 3(2), 9l-\02. Research, 52(4), 2U-224. watch?v=6gmP4nkOEO
primary, junior, intermediate, and
senior teachers (pp. 38-40; 127-131). Grabove, V. (1997). The many faces of Lu, Li-Fen. (2005). Preservice art Zimmerman, E. (1994). Concerns of
Victoria BC: Canadian Society for transformative learning theory and teacher negative attitudes and preservice art teachers and those
Education Through Art. practice. In P. Cranton (Ed.), perceptions of computer-generated who prepare them to teach. Art
Transformative ¡earning in action: art imagery: Recommendations for Education, 47(5), 59-67.
Insights from practice (pp. 89-96). preservice art education programs.
San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Visual Arts Research, 31(1), (Issue
60), 89-102.

34 ART EDUCATiON / September 2011

Copyright of Art Education is the property of National Art Education Association and its content may not be
copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written
permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.