Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
David H. Rose. The authors address the issue of the marginali ation of the arts! "Glass, Meyer, # Rose, $.%&, '()*+, and ho, the design of curriculum doesn-t meet the needs of students. The article advocates the use of arts education along ,ith .niversal Design for /earning ".D/+ to hel$ art educators $lan better curricula. The inclusion of both is also suggested to be beneficial for teaching other areas of study. The $ur$ose of .D/ is to assist in the design and evaluation of curriculum, $rograms, and materials "Glass et al. $. %%, '()*+. In addition, the article reiterates ho, .D/ is ideal for designing curriculum for all students, regardless of their s0ills or talents. This is because .D/ recogni es that every $erson learns differently due to internal factors, li0e the com$le1 net,or0s! of our brains, "Glass et al., $.)((, '()*+ and e1ternal factors such as classrooms. .D/ recogni es that students ,ill have several different learning environments that can affect ho, they learn. .D/ is based off three $rinci$les, those being2 engagement, re$resentation, and action and e1$ression "Glass et al., '()*+. The $oint of the $rinci$les is to $rovide different o$tions for2 ho, students can be involved "engaged+, varied ,ays of understanding ,hat is being taught "re$resentation+, and ho, students sho, ,hat they have learned "action and e1$ression+. 3hat Glass, Meyer, and Rose tal0 about in the article is ho, .D/ can greatly benefit arts education and vice versa, es$ecially since arts education already follo,s some or all of the .D/ $rinci$les. As Glass et al. states, In the .D/ frame,or0, the goal for education is that learners develo$ learning expertise! "$.)(), '()*+. As I said before, .D/ also loo0s at ho, the brain ,or0s so that teachers can better facilitate and understand ho, their students learn. The .D/ guidelines are organi ed around three neural net,or0s that have been associated ,ith learning2 the affective, recognition, and strategic net,or0s! "Glass et al., )(), '()*+. These are the net,or0s of the brain that $ertain to learning. Therefore, understanding that everyone learns differently in terms of the .D/ guidelines of engagement, re$resentation, and action and e1$ression, can hel$ teachers ,hen they create lessons. And so .D/ hel$s in arts education because there ,ill al,ays be students ,ith a ,ide range of s0ills and talents. .D/ is hel$ful to for art teachers to accommodate the diverse students that they ,ill have, and at the same time, design lesson $lans in a ,ay that every student ,ill understand. The goal for using .D/ in arts education is more 4students5 can understand art, more can create it, and more can value it! "Glass et al., $. )(6, '()*+. As Glass, Meyer, and Rose suggest in the article, arts education can also benefit .D/ because of the ,ay the arts already $rovide a lot of o$tions for the guidelines of .D/. In terms of re$resentation, there are several o$tions available to get art students to understand ,hat they-re learning. 7ne of the o$tions mentioned includes 8T9, ,hich is es$ecially hel$ful ,hen an art teacher has students ,ith varied abilities. In terms of engagement, Glass et al. argues that the arts:$rovides more o$tions to recruit interest, sustain engagement, and develo$ self;regulation! "$. ))*, '()*+. /astly, for action and e1$ression, the arts $rovide students the ability to sho, ,hat they-ve learned through the many mediums available in art, allo,ing them to be creative and o$en in ,hat they choose to do. .ltimately, Glass et al. ho$e that through the integration of the arts and .D/ is a better form of education;full and com$le1, cognitive and emotional, and rich ,ith culture and human e1$ression! "$.))<, '()*+.
Research =roblem The goals are clearly stated at the beginning of the article, immediately $ointing out the $ur$ose of $ersuading the reader that .D/ and arts education should be integrated. The authors elaborate on the im$ortance of the effect of .D/ in arts education and vice versa, e1$laining that both can greatly benefit from each other. The authors e1$lained everything ,ell, so that a $erson un0no,ledgeable of .D/ and art can understand the significance the t,o have on students. /iterature Revie, All of the cited sources ,ere relevant to the to$ic, and $rovided the authors ,ith alternate e1$lanations to give the reader different $ers$ectives for understanding. Most of the sources are current, ,ith '6 out of the *( being $ublished ,ithin the years of '(((;'()', and & of those '6 ,ere made ,ithin '()(;'()'. The other 6 sources ,ere $ublished in the )%%(-s. Research >uestions or Hy$otheses The authors clearly state in the beginning of the article ,hat their concerns are and ho, their research ,ill ho$efully benefit the $roblem. Data 9ources?9am$ling There ,as no data source ,here an actual study too0 $lace. The $oint of the research ,as to ta0e ,hat is already 0no,n from .D/ and the arts, $resent that 0no,ledge to the reader, and to $ro$ose the integration of both. The article ,as more about $roviding teachers ,ith the o$tion of utili ing the benefits of .D/ and the arts in their curriculum, rather than actually having teachers change or ad@ust their curriculum to test out those benefits. Measurement Tools 9ince a study did not ta0e $lace, there are no measurement tools. Methodology?=rocedures Aecause this article is not about a study, there are no $rocedures. Results I believe the authors ,ere successful ,ith the selection of their research to hel$ them in their argument. They clearly addressed the $roblem, and $rovided the necessary research for an ans,er to the $roblem. Discussion 9ince this ,asn-t a study, there ,eren-t any conclusions found. Aut again, the research used in the article $rovides an ans,er to the $roblem $resented. Bven though this ,asn-t a study, the research is very relevant to art teachers and educators in general. As Glass et al. e1$lain in the article, there is a lot to benefit from .D/ and the arts.