experiences of primary school teachers

This article was downloaded by: [46.98.1.185] On: 22 March 2014, At: 06:24 Publisher: Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Journal of In-Service Education Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rjie19

Seeking Art Expertise: experiences of primary school teachers a

a

Veronica Sekules , Les Tickle & Maria Xanthoudaki

a

a

University of East Anglia , Norwich, United Kingdom Published online: 19 Dec 2006.

To cite this article: Veronica Sekules , Les Tickle & Maria Xanthoudaki (1999) Seeking Art Expertise: experiences of primary school teachers, Journal of In-Service Education, 25:3, 571-581 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13674589900200099

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content. This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Journal of In-service Education, Vol. 25, No. 3, 1999

SEEKING ART EXPERTISE

Seeking Art Expertise: experiences of primary school teachers

Downloaded by [46.98.1.185] at 06:24 22 March 2014

VERONICA SEKULES, LES TICKLE & MARIA XANTHOUDAKI University of East Anglia, Norwich, United Kingdom

ABSTRACT This article presents the findings of research studying the process of primary teachers’ learning about, and developing understanding of, art through extended use of original objects in a gallery setting. The research was based on a long-term in-service course, which aims to help teachers enhance their subject-knowledge, increase their confidence towards art and art education, devise pedagogical strategies for incorporating museum and gallery visits into their classroom art teaching, and carry out action research. The issues emerging from the study focus on the teachers’ perspectives on and acquisition of subject expertise, and are discussed in the context of the National Curriculum Art (in the form it took until 1999), as well as in the light of theoretical and research arguments in the domains of museum learning, art education and professional development.

Subject Expertise An opportunity to study the process of primary teachers’ perspectives on and acquisition of subject expertise arose during teaching of a long in-service course at the University of East Anglia. This course, at the same time as being a module towards an MA in Education, focuses on art, and draws both on the teachers’ prior experience of and learning about art through extended use of original objects in a gallery setting. It aims to help teachers in (a) the development of knowledge and understanding of art; (b) the translation of newly-acquired knowledge and experience into pedagogical strategies; and (c) the adoption of a reflective approach towards their own learning, and an action-research approach towards their teaching and their pupils’ learning (Tickle & Xanthoudaki, 1998). This article discusses research findings which focus on the first and second of these aims, achieved through a process of ‘collaborative autobiography’ (Butt et al, 1990), which took a particular interest in the role of the teachers’ prior, background experience of art, and their intensive and

571


VERONICA SEKULES ET AL

voluntary dedication to enhancing their personal and pedagogical expertise. Focusing primarily on the teachers as individuals (rather than professionals) when confronting and responding to personal experience, the in-service course and associated research emphasise the importance of investing in teachers’ development of their own interactive experiences of original works of art. By these means they acquire the confidence and expertise necessary to enhance their pupils’ relationships with art. The encounters which we devised as tutors, which were ‘enjoyed’ by the teachers, and observed by a researcher are subject specific. However, the issues regarding the relationship between prior experience and the acquisition of expertise, and the translation of subject knowledge into pedagogical strategies for young children, have parallels in the challenges faced by primary teachers across the curriculum. Department for Education and Employment (DfEE) and Teacher Training Agency (TTA) investment in programmes aimed at enhancing primary teachers’ subject knowledge through in-service courses has a long (but chequered) history. This is based on what has become seen through research (and school inspection) as a persistent, but unsatisfied need to improve subject knowledge (Thornton, 1998). The National Curriculum in England exacerbated the need for subject knowledge, acutely. Art required two main types of knowledge: (a) technical knowledge – familiarising oneself with the creative processes of making art, skilled use of techniques, knowledge of materials, etc.; and (b) aesthetic experience and knowledge of artists and their works in order to be able to develop pupils’ aesthetic understanding (DfEE, 1995). The National Curriculum established the principle that study of original works of art, including those held in museums and galleries, is to be ‘taken account of’ when children make their own artwork. However, we might presume that art objects, and visits to museums and galleries, can be creatively and effectively used only if teachers feel adequately experienced and confident enough in their own subject-knowledge and aesthetic understanding (Tickle, 1996; Xanthoudaki, 1998). Consistent with the widely held view of primary school teachers subject expertise, it is known that the majority gave up the practice and study of art by the age of thirteen (Sanger & Tickle, 1987; Tickle, 1996; Xanthoudaki, 1997). It is no surprise that teachers, including those in this study, should seek opportunities for development of their subject knowledge – though few such opportunities exist. Encountering Art Visual Art in Primary Education is a 1-year in-service course offered by the Centre for Applied Research in Visual Arts Education at the University of East Anglia, Norwich. From 1993–1999, Sedgwick, an international insurance broking and financial services group with a strong community policy encouraging education and the arts, provided scholarships for 572



primary school teachers to attend the course. One hundred teachers and approximately 3500 children from schools in Norfolk and Suffolk have so far benefited from this provision, in a mainly rural region with limited opportunities for visiting museums and galleries. The course makes extensive use of the Robert and Lisa Sainsbury Collection, internationally renowned for its holdings of art from all over the world, from 4000 BC to the present day. It includes the indigenous arts of Western and Central Africa, Australia, New Zealand and many islands of Oceania; art and artefacts made by the Maya and Aztec Indians of Ancient Central America as well as more recent objects by native peoples of the Northwest Coast of North America and Inuit people of the Arctic regions, Indonesia, Japan, China, India and other parts of Asia; antiquities from Egypt, Western Asia and Europe. Among the modern western artists Henry Moore, Alberto Giacometti and Francis Bacon are particularly well represented. There are also major works by Degas, Picasso, Modigliani, and Soutine, as well as contemporary European sculpture and paintings by John Davies, Anthony Green, Yuri Kuper and Antonio Saura, among others. To achieve its aims the year-long course begins with gallery workshops, providing orientations to the connection and initial in-depth encounters with a few chosen objects. The encounters are based upon a philosophy of enquiry and open-ended response, incorporating respect for the perspectives of the students with the development of a questioning stance towards art itself and towards the learning process. Workshops are supported by resource materials which make this approach explicit (Sekules & Tickle, 1993; Tickle & Sekules, 1995; Tickle 1996; Sekules, 1998), and backed up by access to specialist libraries on the artists and cultures represented in the Collection. These activities and materials are devised for the enhancement of the teachers’ personal experience and understanding of art. Evening meetings and three whole day sessions include ‘personal encounters’ with art; support in devising a teaching project, to include a visit with pupils, with a selected focus and stated educational aims; and workshops for designing action research strategies. Literature on art education principles and on classroom action research are provided in order to extend their perspectives on these elements of the course. In the context of the course aims, the teachers can be seen from three different perspectives: (a) as persons ‘in their own right’, bringing dispositions and personal experience when introduced to new art experiences; (b) as teachers, translating newly-acquired knowledge to pedagogical strategies; (c) as novice teacher-researchers – contributing to their professional development through reflective practice, inquiry and critique.

573



Researching the Teachers’ Learning During 1997–98 Veronica Sekules and Les Tickle, as tutors, undertook their own evaluations and action research, while Maria Xanthoudaki acted as a non-participant observer, attending preparatory meetings and all sessions. The non-participant research enabled the close study of the rationale for the course, documentation, input during the sessions, and the examination of the teachers’ responses and learning processes (in the Gallery, in seminars, discussions with teachers, tutorials and in practical art workshops). Study of task sheets and support material (literature on the educational use of museums and galleries) and analysis of the teachers’ reports on their classroom/gallery projects, was also part of the research. One of the claims to innovation of the course is the opportunity for sustained and varied encounters with original objects through the use of the Sainsbury Collection. This enables the teachers to study art closely by a wide range of artists from many cultures, times and places. It also enables reflection on their own responses to them, exploring reasons for different reactions, allowing further observation and thinking about reasons behind a creation, paying attention to feelings and ‘deconstructing’ symbolic elements (Tickle & Xanthoudaki, 1998; Pearce, 1990; Taborsky, 1990). Such sustained experience of original objects appears to be among the main factors influencing the development of a more open-ended, as well as a deepening and accumulative approach towards learning about art (Hargreaves, 1983; Csikszentmihalyi & Robinson, 1990). This opportunity allowed us to study individual responses to the art objects in a context where participants were expected to respond within a constructivist educational approach. They were obliged by the nature of the Collection itself to challenge their preconceptions when initially encountering it, without reference to classroom-related tasks. Only later did we focus on the teachers’ professional role and teaching responsibilities. The term constructivist’ is based on Hein’s arguments in favour of educational methods focusing on the learner rather than on the subject/lesson to be taught and emphasising that knowledge is never independent of the knower (Hein, 1996). According to Hein, the museum visitor/user constructs personal knowledge from an object through interactions between the object properties and her own previous experience, beliefs, thoughts, and dispositions, rather than through traditional models of lectures and text and/or behaviourist processes (Hein, 1995, 1996). Indeed, the course was designed in order to invest in learning through direct aesthetic encounters and experience, interacting with the qualities of the objects and expressing personal views about them. We encouraged the development of the teachers’ confidence through emphasising the subjective nature of aesthetic encounters, where specialised knowledge and background are not a prerequisite for a 574



worthwhile/educational experience. Educational strategies were not offered as ready-made packages, but were explored through experiences fitted’ to each one’s own backgrounds, interests and needs. The power of these encounters is at the heart of ‘understanding’ the subject we call art: For Dewey (1934), the aesthetic experience yields a completeness and a wholeness that ordinary, routine experience lacks. The artistic experience confronts and interacts with expressive aesthetic object the work of art. This object produces a form of resistance; it challenges our past understandings and taken-for-granted meanings. Art expresses meaning; it captures and arrests the imagination, creating an integration or interaction of the self with this aesthetic object and the environment. The individual recreates the artistic object and its meanings, by creating an experience that incorporates the object into an interaction with the self. (Denzin, 1992, p. 102) We aim to encourage and emphasise the importance of one’s ‘personal context’ within sustained experience of original objects through self-paced, interactive, participative activities. This personal context, that is, the teachers’ prior knowledge and experience, dispositions, thoughts, beliefs, attitudes and cultural background (Falk & Dierking, 1992), was found to play a particularly influential role during their encounters with the gallery objects, in ways which illuminate arguments about the principles of museum learning. Although the teachers were not approached as casual gallery visitors but rather as longer-term users of, and learners from, the Collection, as well as from supporting seminars, workshops and educational material, there are several similarities between learning processes during the course and visitors’ learning in a museum or gallery (Roschell, 1995; Tickle & Xanthoudaki, 1998; Xanthoudaki, 1997). Carr (1990) agrees that ‘an adult enters a museum with ... an already established biography as a learner, with a repertoire of knowledge and information’ (Carr, 1990, p. 8) and that this plays a significant role in the development of perception and learning, constituting the background for the individual’s understanding of an object (Dierking, 1996). During a museum experience/interaction with an object, new knowledge (conveyed in the object and related text and/or activities) interacts with, and builds on, the learner’s existing ‘personal context’, on sensory and mental processes, memory, motivation, language, and the physical environment itself (Pearce, 1990; Taborsky, 1990; Hooper-Greenhill, 1991; Falk & Dierking, 1992; Falk et al, 1995; Walsh-Piper, 1994; Dierking, 1996; Hein, 1996;). Different individuals may perceive and understand the same object in different ways – a process which emphasises the importance of focusing learning on the learner rather than trying to ‘teach the truth’, to present the world ‘as it really is’ (Hein, 1996, p. 31). In this case, the teachers’ personal context was found to be an influential factor in their learning experience, not because it constituted 575



the background for building new subject-knowledge, but more importantly because it constituted a negative constraint, at least initially, in the process of their responding to the Collection. The process of developing confidence about the validity of their own views and reasoning, and trusting the ‘expert within’ (Dadds, 1997) was a gradual and sensitive one. Evidence from the workshops, discussions and the teachers’ curriculum vitae shows that encountering and responding to original objects were new experiences for the teachers, not only as professionals, but also as persons ‘in their own right’. They emphasised that their approach to art was determined by the previous lack of (i) opportunities to encounter art; (ii) strategies for approaching art works and artefacts; and (iii) what they saw as specialised subject-knowledge or ‘knowing about art’. It appears that they did not perceive their prior knowledge, beliefs, experience, thoughts and dispositions as a substantial basis for learning, as an ‘established biography (which) frames [their] image of the world’, on which to shape their learning and provide the milieu for developing understanding (Carr, 1990, p. 8). Rather, the teachers felt that not having previous experience of original art works and not having enough information about the artefacts, their making, techniques, histories, meanings, etc., were reasons for not knowing how to look at them. They sometimes felt ‘forced’ to say they liked something out of embarrassment, recognising their ‘inadequacy’. The same (perceived) limited experience and knowledge were also regarded as preventing them from answering ‘correctly’ the tutors’ questions or engaging ‘satisfactorily’ in the course tasks. This feeling of inadequacy and lack of confidence, to use Gombrich’s term, ‘the fear of the outsider’ (1979, p. 201), was found to rest alongside the teachers’ strong feeling of deficiency in terms of the National Curriculum requirements and, consequently, their responsibility as professional. The ‘fear’ and the perceived ‘professional inadequacy’ appear to be the main reasons for a range of observed negative/unconfident attitudes towards their own abilities and potential (Tickle & Xanthoudaki, 1998). However, before analysing these two points further, we would like briefly to consider again the nature and characteristics of the aesthetic experience in order to place this research into context. Maquet (1986) emphasising the intensity of the aesthetic experience (between the beholder and the object), points out that it ‘frames apart the object from its visual environment in order to favour the concentration of attention of the beholder’; and that ‘the context of the object – historical, sociological and stylistic – so important for the historian, is irrelevant for the aesthetic beholder’ (Maquet, 1986, p. 32). Maquet argues for five more characteristics of the aesthetic experience, stressing the significance of the ‘totality’ of the object prevailing over any awareness of context, everyday conventions, time or space in the beholder (pp. 25–33). Spontaneity and intensity are, therefore, among the main properties of aesthetic experience.

576



In the case of this particular group of teachers their fears and feelings of inadequacy severely restricted or even denied any spontaneity during their encounters. It is possible that some did have an aesthetic experience of the kind that Maquet describes. However, for most the self-perception of limitations which was evident suggests that the ‘challenges’ and ‘confrontations’ described by Dewey were so intense that as ‘interactions with the self they apparently held the potential to become traumatic in either the conversive or aversive senses delineated by Hargreaves (1983). That is, the fears could be compounded or alleviated depending on how these new experiences were facilitated. However, is there more than just lack of specialised ‘knowledge’ that initiated these fears and perceptions in the teachers? Among them they described a common and strongly held ‘conventional’ definition of art, which appears to influence their preferences and responses, and at the same time strengthen their feeling of ‘not knowing about’ art and ‘not knowing how’ to approach it. These preferences were noticeably challenged by the Collection, which holds few works corresponding to those definitions. Their approval/acceptance of and even their interest in an object appeared to be closely connected to the idea of a realistic or naturalistic image, rather than works which reflect the artist’s feelings/impressions, or work built on metaphors beyond representational realism. Many of the teachers pointed out that they came to the course with a rather limited understanding of ‘what art is’ – accepting as art a work only if it was close to the chocolate box’ image, as some of them put it. They were also attracted by objects which gave the impression of a finished/completed/perfected work, whereas they had strong negative reactions to objects which evoked a feeling of ‘not-perfect’. There were further difficulties in accepting as art items which were not initially created for pleasurable display – such as ritual and ceremonial objects, domestic implements, and reliquary objects. The new challenge offered by the Collection – where the teachers could experience objects of considerable variety, predominantly sculptural, many of them controversial, others initially created for utilitarian purposes and made from a wide variety of materials – often encouraged a feeling of ‘outsider’ from the domain of art creation and art appreciation. Furthermore, their perceptions of their limitations in terms of subject knowledge and competence made them hesitant about trusting their own ‘personal context’ as an effective ‘tool’ when initiating similar experiences for their pupils. Within their personal knowledge and expertise the teachers might have preferred a role of ‘receiving and delivering centrally-packaged decisions’, rather than one of knowing about personal resources and one’s ‘professional craft’ (Dadds, 1997). In many cases, the teachers were found to have had experience of ‘safety’ following the usual pastiche processes in art making or avoiding any follow-up of a gallery visit in their classroom, dreading moments where their pupils’ need to expand their knowledge and understanding might meet their own subject-knowledge limits (Tickle, 1996). 577



However, the teachers’ fear on the one hand, and the challenging potential of the gallery Collection on the other, was the basis of their drive for improvement, for themselves as individuals and as teachers. They displayed a strong will to balance their fears, perceptions of inadequacy, and lack of confidence with the new challenge of knowledge to be acquired and opportunities to experience and learn from the wide variety of objects in the gallery, and the ‘respectful inquirer’ approach to aesthetic encounters. We would claim that the investment of professional capital which their will and determination represents was matched by three crucial factors in the programme design: the fact that the initial responses and preferences were dramatically challenged by the nature of the Collection; the sustained experience; and the ‘constructivist’ course input – a ‘no answer is wrong’ approach – which encouraged an open-minded attitude to art works and artefacts and emphasised the importance of one’s personal context when encountering art (Sekules, 1998). While doubts about the ability to respond ‘correctly’/adequately to art persisted in some cases, most of the teachers gradually allowed more flexibility in their thinking both about the art and about themselves as collaborative enquirers. They opened up to discussion about objects which they did not like, trying to see beyond the first impression and understand the ‘messages’, and the reasons behind the creation of artworks. This constituted the motivation for more and deeper engagement with the Collection, through farther interactive experiences which encouraged the initial fear to be replaced by increased enthusiasm and confidence. The desire to know more was their reason for being in the course. The increased enthusiasm and confidence initiated new interests and discoveries through the pursuit of the wider resources available in the surrounding environment – course materials; libraries; local artists in their villages. Gradually, the perceived need to be ‘informed’ by tutors evolved to a more constructivist approach towards their tasks, learning to trust the ‘expert within’, building on their own ideas, experience and judgement for the various tasks involved in translating knowledge into pedagogical strategies (Dadds, 1997, p. 33; Calderhead & Shorrock, 1997). The teachers devised their teaching/action research projects in order to use the Collection and these wider resources to maximise their pupils’ learning. They regarded their teaching projects as an opportunity for enhancing pupils’ knowledge and experience and as an opportunity to gain for themselves a better personal understanding of art. Becoming Expert The course offered the teachers the opportunity to ‘change from passive to active, from spectators and recipients to creators and actors ... [to] become determined facilitators and critical receivers of information’ (Carr, 1990, p. 11). In other words, to gain the confidence in approaching art as individuals and in expanding their pupils’ personal experience beyond the 578



conventional images of art. However, it seems that although more people than ever before may be aware of art and many of its contemporary forms and means, still some find particular difficulty in responding to its diversity. Some avoid gallery visits altogether, remaining untutored in art appreciation (Sanger & Tickle, 1987; Berrin & Dreyfus, 1990). In the case of primary school teachers, such reluctance is of particular relevance due to their responsibility towards developing their pupils’ own interest in and understanding of art. The research findings have important messages in terms of the need for focused, carefully-structured and sensitive in-service professional development, which will enable teachers to view the lack of subject-knowledge, expertise and confidence in a ‘constructivist’ manner, capitalising on their will to invest in their own enhancement of knowledge and understanding as the primary means by which they can bring to their pupils greater opportunities for experiencing art than they themselves previously had. In that process it is necessary, it seems, to assert the authentic nature of a subject in the first place, to prepare for the confrontational aspects of its learning, and to build biographies actively, and with sensitivity. Correspondence Veronica Sekules, Sainsbury Centre for Visual Arts, University of East Anglia, Norwich NR4 7TJ, United Kingdom ([email protected]). References Berrin, K. & Dreyfus, R. (1990) Capitalising on a Museum’s Resources to Increase Public Education in the Arts, in J.W. Solinger (Ed.) Museums and Universities: new paths for continuing education. New York: Macmillan. Butt, K., Townsend, D. & Raymond, D. (1990) Bringing Reform to Life: teachers’ stories and professional development, Cambridge Journal of Education, 20, pp. 255–268. Calderhead, J. & Shorrock, S.B. (1997) Understanding Teacher Education. London: FalmerPress. Carr, D. (1990) The Adult Learner in the Museum, in J.W. Solinger (Ed.) Museums and Universities: new paths for continuing education. New York: Macmillan. Csikszentmihalyi, M. & Robinson, R.E. (1990) The Art of Seeing: an interpretation of the aesthetic encounter. Malibu: J. Paul Getty Museum and Getty Center for Education in the Arts. Dadds, M. (1997) Continuing Professional Development: nurturing the expert within, British Journal of In-service Education, 23, pp. 31–38. Denzin, N. (1992) Symbolic Interactionism and Cultural Studies: the politics of interpretation. London: Sage. Department for Education (1995) Art in the National Curriculum. London: HMSO.

579



Dierking, L.D. (1996) Contemporary Theories of Learning, in G. Durbin (Ed.) Developing Museum Exhibitions for Lifelong Learning. London: Museums & Galleries Commission. Falk, J.H. & Dierking, L.D. (1992) The Museum Experience. Washington: Whalesback Books. Falk, J.H., Dierking, L.D. & Holland, D.G. (1995) What Do We Think People Learn in Museums?, in J.H. Falk & L.D. Dierkin (Eds) Public Institutions for Personal Learning: establishing a research agenda. Washington: American Association of Museums. Gombrich, E.H. (1979) Ideals and Idols: essays on values in history and in art. Oxford: Phaidon. Hargreaves, D.H. (1983) The Teaching of Art and the Art of Teaching: towards an alternative view of aesthetic learning, in M. Hammersley & A. Hargreaves (Eds) Curriculum Practice: some sociological case studies. London: Falmer Press. Hein, G. (1995) The Constructivist Museum, Journal of Education in Museums, 16, pp. 21–23. Hein, G. (1996) Constructivist Learning Theory, in C. Durbin (Ed) Developing Museum Exhibitions for Lifelong Learning. London: Museums & Galleries Commission. Hooper-Greenhill, E. (1991) Museum and Gallery Education. Leicester: Leicester University Press. Maquet, J. (1986) The Aesthetic Experience. New Haven: Yale University Press. Pearce, S.M. (1990) Objects of Meaning; or narrating the past, in S.M. Pearce (Ed.) Objects of Knowledge. London: Athlone Press. Roschell, J. (1995) Learning in Interactive Environments: prior knowledge and new experience, in J.H. Fallk & L.D. Dierking (Eds) Public Institutions for Personal Learning: establishing a research agenda. Washington: American Association of Museums. Sanger, J. & Tickle, L. (1987) Art for Pupils’ Sake: deprogramming student teachers, in L. Tickle (Ed.) The Arts in Education: some research studies. London: Croom Helm. Sekules, V. (Ed.) (1998) Approaching Art: art and objects selected from the Sainsbury Centre for Visual Arts. Norwich: Centre for Applied Research in Visual Arts Education. Sekules, V. & Tickle, L. (Eds) (1993) Starting Points: approaches to art objects selected from the Sainsbury Centre for Visual Arts. Norwich: Centre for Applied Research in Visual Arts Education. Taborsky, E. (1990) The Discursive Object, in S. Pearce (Ed.) Objects of Knowledge. London: Athlone Press. Thorton, M. (1998) Subject Specialists – Primary Schools, UCET Occasional Paper, presented at the European Conference on Educational Research, Ljubljana, September 1998. Tickle, L. (Ed.) (1996) Understanding Art in Primary Schools: cases from teachers’ research. London: Routledge. Tickle, L. & Sekules, V. (Eds) (1995) Interpretations: approaches to art objects Selected from the Sainsbury Centre for Visual Arts. Norwich: Centre for Applied Research in Visual Arts Education.

580



Tickle, L. & Xanthoudaki, M. (1998) Primary Teachers and the Hunt for Knowledge, unpublished paper presented at the European Conference of Educational Research, Ljubljana, Slovenia, 17–20 September. Walsh-Piper, K. (1994) Museum Education and Aesthetic Experience, Journal of Aesthetic Education, 28(3,), pp. 105–115. Xanthoudaki, M. (1997) Museum and Gallery Educational Programmes in England and Greece: their content and structure and their contribution to art education in primary schools, unpublished PhD thesis, University of Sussex. Xanthoudaki, M. (1998) Is it Always Worth the Trip? The Contribution of Museum and Gallery Educational Programmes to Classroom Art Education, Cambridge Journal of Education, 28, pp. 181–195.

581