Response to: The line and texture of aesthetic response:

Primary children study authors and illustrators

Sandra Madura (1995)

          Approaching the language arts curriculum through the world of the picture book as

          an art form established a learning environment that valued beauty, personal

          reflection, and the process of creating visual and written compositions.

                                                                                                    Sandra Madura (1995:67).

     In The line and texture of aesthetic response: Primary children study authors and illustrators (1995), Sandra Madura puts forth a potent argument that using picture-books enriches teach-learn (*). As an extension, the author suggests that long term author-illustrator studies – contrary to the assumption that they would be too difficult, or boring - not only can be done with primary-aged children, but that such studies, “enrich the possibilities for (personal) response” (61). More implicitly, she suggests that such studies can make teach-learn more meaningful and easier, and can strengthen the endurance of skills, knowledge, and concepts engaged with. More broadly, the use of author/illustrator picture book studies is such a powerful tool that children also develop self-awareness, and tolerance for diversity. Finally, Madura suggests that the skills, knowledge, concepts, and attitudes “produced” by these close readings can be generalized both across grades and subjects.

     Any teacher would support in-depth studies of any kind, and considering that we are dealing with primary grades, the use of picture-books is not a very controversial idea either. So, why are the depth author/illustrator studies seen to be of such value? Citing Rosenblatt (1989), Madura argues that meaning does not reside in a text or in a reader, but rather, “happens” during the transaction between the two during reading, reacting, and interpreting. The newly produced, “textual entity” (62), is both the product and proof that the use of literature is an active and powerful tool to use with children. As their own perspectives, biases, and desires are teased out in study, and as they are exposed to these personal aspects of others through discussion and sharing, children become more self-aware.

     Madura feels that this multi-faceted nature of aesthetic response to literature suggested above is heightened even further when pictures are added to the text. Agreeing with the picture-book as art object view of Kiefer (1991), the author sees pictures as adding to the text, interacting with it to create, “one unified form - a feast both verbally and visually” (62). The value of picture-books is in their dual textual-pictorial nature: the level of interaction with the text occurs on more levels, and the intensity, so to speak, is that much heightened.

    Finally, Madura, following Eisner, takes it a step further, and suggests that art in general enables one to teach-learn tolerance, diversity, and self-knowledge. Eisner states that the intrinsic nature of art creates the chance, “to invent novel ways to combine elements”. Such interaction with a text, in and of itself, allows us to see/feel other possibilities in a non-threatening way. Further, doing, thinking about, and sharing art with others can help us to become self-and other-aware: the attention to interpretation over answers helps us to see how we come to our interpretations (our experiences, our beliefs, our philosophies interact with the text), and the act of collaboration and sharing with peers forces us to recognize that others must do the same.

     In supporting her claims for the utility of author-illustrator studies in implementing the above learning philosophies in the primary classroom, Madura uses methodology and classroom observation as evidence. Such studies are quite long – usually around a month – and many skills,

______________________________________________________________________________

* (This term “teach-learn” will used to refer to the dual natured, inseparable concept implied in the Chinese proverb: when one teaches, two learn).

knowledge, concepts and attitudes are incorporated into the units. Before embarking on the study, for example, students are involved in deciding on their goals (to become author-illustrators), and how to achieve them. The students were able to articulate that in order to write and look like an author-illustrator, they would have to know how stories were written, and to know how text and illustrations interacted. Repeated reading of the texts of an author expanded the depth and breadth of discussion; into the second week, children would select passages from books to support their claims, were able to recognize themes, common settings, and the language techniques used by an author. Madura feels that through communication, sharing, analyzing, and sheer exposure students’ abilities to recognize patterns, recall facts and ideas, and to identify specifics increased; they were able to: “develop a growing awareness of aesthetic factors and of the artist’s role in choosing these factors to express meaning” (62).

     The author extended the visual analysis explored in language class, to explore the medium and methods used by the author in art class. Madura would give lessons on particular aspects of the illustrator’s techniques. Guided lessons allowed for a fuller exploration of the visual representations analyzed in language class, and not only, the author found, did such lessons complement and expand the medium more fully, they, “offered me the opportunity to introduce specific vocabulary such as overlapping, primary and complementary colors, texture, and composition” (115). In the anecdotal evidence provided, students seemed to be able to use the specialized vocabulary, recognize technique, and - perhaps due to the focus on the author as a person - were able to recognize the hard work involved in artistic creation: “I bet Eric Carle had lots of smudges on his paper when he first started. Maybe that was why he started using more painted backgrounds – to cover up his smudges” (116). This example of using painted backgrounds to cover up the smudges shows an awareness of the often accidental, practical nature of art not often seen even among adults.

     While generally agreeing with the author about the use of in-depth studies, as well as the importance of both language and visual arts in teaching children skills, knowledge, as well as wider humanistic lessons, I suggest that the author overlooks a couple of key questions that she, herself raises. Keeping in mind that she makes no claim for ranking, would picture-books, considering their value, actually be better than text-only books for junior, or intermediate grades? There is also a possible conflict in the possibility that pictures limit the perceptions of the children, who will most likely prefer the “perfect” material to their own creations, and just end up copying these works.

     Another point of contention is that some of the claims made about the author-illustrator studies seem to be overstated. Most of the claimed benefits of author-illustrator studies are not particular to it, and merely reflect good teaching. Having children, for example, consider what to look for in a text, and to pay attention to detail does not seem like a revolutionary idea, merely good, organized teaching. There is nothing in this article, the benefits of integrated curriculum, the use of art as a safe haven to explore the self and social concepts, the view that in-depth studies allow for subtler, more varied discussion, etc. that seems new theoretically. These are arguments, in fact, similar to that put forth by Davies et al (1993), in which they argue for the use of themes in creating a meaningful classroom. It would be easy to substitute the words author-illustrator studies for the word themes in the following passage:

     Successful themes … are relevant, connected, fun, purposeful, provide for choice, and

     integrate different subjects. Themes work best when we consider the total needs of our

     children and use the themes to invite new learning … Themes give teachers ways to

     identify and invite connections … The shared experience of constructing knowledge

     through a theme gives learners opportunities to connect with one another (4).

None of this, however, makes the author’s argument invalid, and in fact the potency with which Madura argues is inspirational. The skills, knowledge, and perhaps most importantly, attitudes and values derived from the method of close readings are certainly worthy, and most importantly, generalizable both within and across grades.

     I enjoyed reading this article because it opened up the possibility of using such sophisticated methods of teaching even with young learners. I was very excited by the integration that this approach allows, even in the limited language/visual-arts context presented in the article; this was a far cry from the types of teaching experiences that I have encountered in school myself. I am quite attracted to systemic type structures of all kinds (I actually like Understanding by Design, and am prone to diving into a new artist or director for a few months), yet unfortunately I can remember only one time that I ever experienced such holistic approaches to teach-learn; in high-school, my geography, history, and English classes were all coordinated at one part in the year to focus on, respectively: the environment of the American south; the civil war, and; American authors from the south. I can remember being very satisfied during this period, and actually commented to one of the teachers that this period of time was very productive for me (this particular teacher later gave me an excellent reference letter!).

     As for trying to use these techniques in the classroom, I am all for it. In fact I have used similar techniques during my experiences teaching a half-day English immersion program in Taiwan. While the focus of the program was for children to study English, we had to do this through teaching other subjects, including math, science, and social studies. The books that I used in this program were a four-subject series by Creative Teaching Press, in which particular author-illustrators, or author-illustrator teams featured repeatedly. During each unit we would often study the form of the story, as well as the particular art style of the authors. Sometimes we made class books in which we would follow the story structure as well as the art-style of the illustrator. In the future, I will try to use author-illustrator studies, and in particular would like to try and use them to introduce the non-art topics of the curriculum. In the just mentioned CTP series, for example, some particular author-illustrators would appear the science books, and the fact that the children liked this author’s style offered me an opportunity to motivate them to learn learning something that most did not feel very interested in.

     As a final note, in my experiences, I was often challenged in finding ways to connect art with science, as opposed to language arts, which always seems to be a better fit. After reading the article, I feel more positive about the prospects of this. Following Bruner:

     we construct reality by the process of knowing … it is art in general that provides the

    conditions that make it possible for humans to feel connectedness or identification with

    others, and to experience compassion for the world” (48 IN Gray).

I feel that considering their limited temporal and physical experiences, art provides children with an opportunity to explore. While art lends itself to open discussion and free interpretation, I would argue, as Wiggins and Mctigue (1998) have in their theory of uncoverage, that having children play with different concepts, think in novel ways, re-analyze and re-analyze ideas all reflect that possibility that something akin to “artistic” method can and should be applied to the teaching of all subjects.

REFERENCES

Bruner, J. (1979). In Gray (2002). Course Notes, p. 48.

Davies, A., Politano, C., & Cameron, C., (1993). Making Themes Work. Peguis Publishers, Winnipeg, MB.

Gray, C. (2002). Course Notes.

Madura, S. (1995). The line and texture of aesthetic response: Primary children study authors and illustrators. In Gray (2002). Course Notes, pp. 61-69.

Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (1998). Understanding by Design. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development: Alexandria, Virginia