1

Running head: QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS OF A CHILDS ARTWORK

A Qualitative Analysis of a Childs Artwork
Elizabeth Flanagin
University of Missouri

2
QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS OF A CHILDS ARTWORK

A Qualitative Analysis of a Childs Artwork
R-Directed Thinking is creative and artistic thinking. It is thinking that used to be the
passenger, but is now grabbing the wheel, stepping on the gas, and determining where were
going and how well get there (Pink, 2005, p. 26-27). There is an obvious shift that is occurring
in our society. It is a shift that is moving us from an Age of Logic to an Age of Emotion, and
throughout his book, A Whole New Mind, Daniel Pink argues that the demand for R-Directed
Thinking is now at an all-time high. If there is such a demand for this kind of thinking though,
why do students not get the same amount of R-Directed instruction through classes like art that
they get for L-Directed instruction through classes like math? This is where the elementary
teacher can step in and help. It is their job to allow students to creatively express themselves
through artwork, starting at a young age. When teachers then interpret and analyze their students
creativity, which is what I will be doing in this paper, it is beneficial to both the teacher and the
students. On the one hand, the teacher gains a better understanding of their students creative
thinking, and they learn what types of projects are developmentally appropriate for their
students. On the other hand, students become more comfortable using creativity in their everyday
lives. This will eventually lead to the creation of the best members of society, because these
students will have the creative and artistic skills that will place them in the most powerful
positions of society.
Method
In order to be able to be able to effectively interpret a students work of art and
understand their unique expression, teachers must have knowledge of different theories of artistic
3
QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS OF A CHILDS ARTWORK
development to aid them in analyzing work. One of these theories is outlined by Viktor
Lowenfeld and W.L. Brittain. They propose that children progress through stages of
development in their artwork in predictable ways, with wide variations within an age norm or
stage (Erickson & Young, 1996, p. 41). There are typical drawing characteristics, spacial
representations, and human-figure representations for each stage. The first stage is the Scribbling
Stage. Second is the Preschematic Stage, third is the Schematic Stage, and fourth is the Gang
Age. The fifth stage is the Pseudo-Naturalistic Stage, and the last stage is Adolescent Art
(Brittain & Lowenfeld, 1970).
Given the importance of an artistically competent society, the lack of artistic instruction
in our current school system, and the knowledge that elementary teachers need to be able to
analyze student work in order to understand and nurture creative expression in their students, I
will now proceed with conducting my own analysis of a students artwork. I selected the work
that I will be using for my analysis out of a large group of various students work, and I chose it
because it seemed interesting. I do not know the name or real age of the student who created this
work, but using my analysis, I will tell the age that I believe the child to be. I will use Brittain
and Lowenfelds theory of artistic development as the framework for my analysis. I will place
this student into one of the six developmental stages mentioned previously.
Findings
The childs work that I am analyzing is a drawing (see figure 1: Student drawing). It was
made with a mixture of black pen and faded black marker. The work was drawn on white paper
that lies horizontally. The child drew a very thick line of scribbles with the pen all over the
bottom of the page. These scribbles take up about one third of the entire picture, and I believe
4
QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS OF A CHILDS ARTWORK
they represent the ground. The child also drew a much thinner line of scribbles along the top of
the page with the marker. These scribbles do not quite extend the entire length of the page, and I
believe they represent the sky. There is a sun that is drawn in the upper-right corner of the page,
situated right below the sky line. On top of the ground, there is a cat drawn in marker. The cat
has a very thin body that is striped. He has long, skinny, stick legs and a tail. His face has two
eyes that are represented by dots, a nose, and whiskers. In pen, the child added details to the cat.
He gave the cat ears, he colored in the stripes on his back, and he gave the cat wings. Right
below where the sun is drawn, there are two objects in the sky that are unrecognizable, and they
have been colored in heavily with the black marker. Below those objects, extending from the
right hand side of the page to the cats tail is a long, black marker scribble, with a little ball on
the end. I believe this represents yarn that the cat is playing with. Lastly, in this drawing, the
students wrote 23$ with pen in the upper-left corner of the paper.

Figure 1: Student drawing
5
QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS OF A CHILDS ARTWORK
Given the characteristics of this childs drawing, I believe he is in the Preschematic Stage
of artistic development. During this stage, children often draw objects that are not related to one
another in their pictures (Brittain & Lowenfeld, 1970). In this piece, the child drew a striped cat,
but he gave him wings. Wings do not really belong on a cat, so the two are not related to one
another. Also, the child wrote 23$ on his picture. That phrase has nothing to do with a cat, and
there is nothing else in this childs drawing that has to do with money. Therefore, the phrase
23$ and the rest of the picture are not related to one another. For the most part, however, this
childs picture does make sense. There is a cat, which is outside, and he is playing with a ball of
yarn. Typically children in the Preschematic Stage range from the ages of four to seven years-old
(Brittain & Lowenfeld, 1970). Given that most of the things in this childs picture are related to
one another, and there are only a few things that are not, I would guess that he is about six or
seven, in the later part of this stage. According to Brittain and Lowenfeld (1970), children that
are in the Preschematic Stage tend to list objects that are known to them in their pictures. This is
evident through the phrase 23$ that the child has written. It is a phrase that is unrelated to the
rest of the picture, but it is obviously something that the child is proud of knowing, because he
included it. Another characteristic of children in this stage of artistic development is that they
make the size of the objects disproportional to one another (Brittain & Lowenfeld, 1970). In this
students work, the sun is the same size as the cat that he drew, when in reality, those two things
are not the same size. Also, this child made the ground cover about one third of his drawing, and
the sky cover a small strip. Really, the sky and ground should cover about the same amount of
area, because they should be proportional to one another. Lastly, Brittain and Lowenfeld (1970)
say that children in the Preschematic Stage of artistic development begin to include arms, a body,
fingers, toes, clothes, hair, and other details to the humans and figures in their work when they
6
QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS OF A CHILDS ARTWORK
are in the latter part of this stage. This backs up my assumption that this student is towards the
end of the Preschematic Stage, because he included many of these features in his picture. For
instance, he drew four legs on the cat, and a body. He included a face on the cat, with eyes, ears,
a nose, and whiskers. He gave the cat stripes on his back, a tail, and wings.
Conclusion
Now that I know that this student is in the Preschematic Stage of development, I can use
that knowledge to benefit myself and the student. As the teacher, I can see that the decisions this
student chose to make, like put wings on the cat, are developmentally appropriate and that they
serve as an expression of creativity. To get an even deeper understanding of why this student
made the decisions that he did, I could ask him questions like why did you draw wings on your
cat? Tell me what you were thinking. If I am a teacher that understands what is developmentally
appropriate and that students are always expressing their creativity through artwork, it is more
likely that I will be less critical, and more encouraging of each students work. It is important for
a child in the Preschematic Stage of development to feel that it is okay to use their creativity too,
because if they do not get to explore with their ideas, they will never be comfortable using those
ideas in their adult life or outside of the classroom setting. This means, as the teacher, I cannot
allow myself to squelch my students creativity. Knowing that this child is in the Preschematic
Stage of artistic development will also allow me to more easily decide what types of art projects
are appropriate for this student when I integrate them into different subjects. Mick Luehrman and
Kathy Unrath (2006) wrote about the importance of this idea in an article, where they stated, It
is important for art teachers to understand how children develop artisticallyThis kind of
knowledge is essential for choosing age-appropriate teaching strategies and content for the units
and lessons (p. 6). This means that as the teacher, I should not expect this particular student to
7
QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS OF A CHILDS ARTWORK
be able to draw a perfect, realistic picture of a tiger for a science project, because they are still
exploring and not developmentally ready for that. As the student, this child will only benefit
from having a teacher that is aware of the different theories and stages of artistic development for
children, because he will be doing projects that are developmentally appropriate, and also
because the creative skills that will be fostered and encouraged will give him an advantage over
other individuals when they are competing for jobs in the future. In other words, this child will
have the R-Directed thinking skills that are in such high demand in todays society.
Erickson and Young (2006) once did a study where they compared the artwork of
prospective elementary teachers to the artwork of elementary students, by categorizing their
drawings into one of Brittain and Lowenfelds stages of artistic development. They found, not
surprisingly, that many of the college students drawings were not more sophisticated than the
elementary students. This study drives home the point that levels of creativity are often stifled in
people at a young age, which occurs when teachers do not allow children to freely express
themselves through art. Teachers should be encouraging students to use their creativity and not
holding them back, because a demand for artistry and creativity in the work place is making
artistic expression valuable to potential employers. It is a horrific paradox, and the only way that
we can overcome it is to help students become creative thinkers and innovators. This is a tall
order for any teacher to fill, but it is possible and rewarding. It starts with understanding the
theories and stages of artistic development, and ends with young people growing up to be
productive leaders who make a difference in society.

8
QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS OF A CHILDS ARTWORK
References
Brittain, W. L., & Lowenfeld, V. (1970). Creative and mental growth. New York, NY:
MacMillan Co. 474-479.
Erickson, M., & Young, B. (1996). Art Advocacy: What every educator should (but maybe
doesnt) Know. School Arts, 40-42.
Luehrman, M., & Unrath, K. (2006). Making theories of childrens artistic development
meaningful for preservice teacher. Art Education, 6-12.
Pink, D. H. (2005). A whole new mind. New York, NY: Penguin Group.