Forms of Knowledge in Art Education and the Corollary of Authenticity in the Teaching and Assessment of Such Forms of Knowledge

Abstract

This article explores why art education after modernism needs to engage with and assess two forms of knowledge. It distinguishes procedural knowledge or ‘knowing how’ from declarative knowledge or ‘knowing that’, and argues that current classroom practice and more general thinking in art education in the UK confuses evidence of procedural knowledge with evidence for declarative knowledge. A corollary is that assessment evidence for ‘knowing how’, which is shown or demonstrated, is confused with assessment evidence for ‘knowing that’, which requires spoken or written forms of reporting. This conceptual confusion is currently embedded in the national, flagship examination known as the General Certificate of Secondary Education, taken by students at the age of 16, resulting in that examination requiring evidence of understanding the meaning of art in its socio‐historical context while at the same time denying the necessity of written or spoken work to reveal such knowledge. The article advocates a Wittgensteinian, socio‐cultural solution to the confusions of current practice.

Visual Arts Declarative Knowledge: Tensions in Theory, Resolutions in Practice

“…This research has examined a topical problem expounded by Cunliffe (2005a;2005b), namely, that of teaching and learning of declarative knowledges in art education. The analysis showed that the form of knowledge requiring understanding (the visual art work) and the form by which that understanding is represented (written description) is both subject specific and complex.…”

“…This evidence is usually produced in a spoken or written form. Cunliffe (2005a;2005b) reviews a number of research studies that reveal the multifarious ways declarative knowledge outcomes are inappropriately subsumed within procedural knowledge outcomes in policy documents in the UK and instances of practice where processes for developing declarative knowledge are non-existent.…”

Revisiting the Conceptual Domain: Educational Knowledge and the Visual Arts

“…Although Cunliffe (2005Cunliffe ( , 2008Cunliffe ( , 2011 has identified several knowledge issues associated with art education, more work is needed if knowledge is to be structured and shared in ways that support pedagogic rights. Boden (2011) maintains that knowledge is fundamental in processes leading to transformational creativity as 'producing something that is surprising, intelligible, and of lasting cultural significance requires extensive understanding of a knowledge domain' (Cunliffe 2011, 5).…”

Living artists: Identity, independence and engagement in Fine Art learning

“…Although debates on the educational role of art have been informed by the writing of major learning theorists (Perkins 1988;Gardner 1988), their lack of a practice focus has hindered clarification of what is involved for practitioners as well as wider understanding of studio-based pedagogies. Recent literature on learning in Fine Art adopts theoretically informed approaches (Heywood 2009;Corner 2005), recognizing its diverse epistemologies in describing the intersection of practice and knowledge (Exley 2008) and debating the nature of visual arts declarative knowledge (Cunliffe 2005). Practitioner views on these topics are also surfacing, with recent issues of practice-oriented journals dedicated to their dissemination (Fortnum and Smith 2007;Finch and Smith 2009;Robinson 2009).…”