The Limits of Theory in Art Education

Abstract

The last forty years have seen substantial and dramatic changes in the thinking about education in art. Changes have taken place in art itself and there have been incredible social, political and economic upheavals. All this has led to an enlarged view of art education. It has given rise to the need for greater dialogue and debate. In more recent years, there have been more concentrated and focussed efforts to establish art curricula and standards of accomplishment for art education. In England, there has been the introduction of the National Curriculum and in the USA there has been the development of the National Standards for Arts Education. In both countries there have been numerous efforts at national or state, local and school levels aimed at assessing what students’ `know and are able to do’ in the arts. The role of theory in art education is of some importance. It is through theory that a systematic accounting can be constructed that explains and makes consistent the individual critiques of what is going on in classrooms, schools, committees and the nation‐at‐large. The paper discusses developments in England and the United States with regard to the theoretical development of curricula and the means for evaluation in art education. It also outlines and discusses the `limits of theory in art education’. It is not opposed to theory; rather it is posited that preoccupations with theory should not over‐ride the importance of maintaining a multiplicity of competing (or emerging) meanings. It is argued that theories should inform and illuminate actions rather than place arbitrary limits upon them.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 15 citations exist upstream.