Author: Gee, Constance Baumgartner

Publication Year:

Media Type: Periodical (article)

Summary:

Abstract:

This essay raises key points about the impact of Reviewing Education and the Arts Project (REAP) and explains why it has upset many in the field.  The author suggests that the confusion stemming from the reports is because the art field (artists, arts educators, administrators, and advocates) is not familiar with the nuances and complexities of research. Furthermore, she claims they are not likely to understand what differentiates qualitative research from quantitative and what types of effects can and cannot be measured quantitatively. This is critical because qualitative measures are believed to be more appropriate to determine the variances and subtleties of arts learning, although it is commonly noted that quantitative data garners the greatest attention, respect, and funding.

The essay continues with an analysis of the reactions to the research, yet it ends on a high note, advising the field that they need to continue to analyze, evaluate, and build upon their accomplishments in curricula development. It is the solid ground on which arts education policy and programming must be built. She calls for the field to be vigilant that hype and political maneuvering are not allowed to trump scholarship.

Arts & Intersections:

Categories: Arts Education