Running head: Analysis of Developmental Progression in Art and Education

Analysis of Developmental Progression in Art and Education

Meg Smith
University of Missouri

!1

Analysis of Developmental Progression in Art and Education

!2

Analysis of Developmental Progression in Art and Education

Elliot Eisner, a professor of education and the arts at Stanford University, stated that,
Education can learn from the arts that open-ended tasks permit the exercise of imagination, and
the exercise of imagination is one of the most important of human aptitudes (2009, p. 9). In
other words, giving children the opportunity to express their creativity though art with little
restrictions or parameters opens the door for growth in all areas of development. As educators, it
is important to understand this process because it can provide insight into each one of our
students cognitive and motor skill levels. To better understand the progression of developmental
stages in art and other subjects, I assessed the drawing of a second grade student in my host
classroom, Julie (a pseudonym). After reviewing the characteristics of each of Brittain and
Lowenfelds drawing stages and and examining Julies drawing, I have concluded that she is in
the Preschematic Stage of representation.
Method
As a seven year old in second grade, Julie would fall in to either the Preschematic or
Schematic stages of development. One stage is not necessarily standard for all children her age,
as seven year olds fall in both categories. I chose Julie because she follows directions, completes
her work to the best of her ability, and asks questions when she needs clarification. In other
words, Julie is a wonderful student and role model in the classroom, and I knew that she would
take her time to complete a drawing that her and I would both be proud of, and that I would be
able to properly assess.
I first sat Julie down at a table outside of my host classroom, and told her that I needed
her to draw a me a picture. I told her that it was just for fun, and that I needed the drawing for my

Analysis of Developmental Progression in Art and Education

!3

art teacher at Mizzou. I wanted to take some of the pressure off of Julie, so that she would not
think that I was judging her artistic abilities or expecting her to create a masterpiece with her
crayons. Once I established a positive work environment, I gave Julie the option of three pictures
to draw: her family, a self portrait, or an outdoor scene. Julie chose to draw an outdoor scene, and
picked up a crayon to begin filling up her blank sheet of paper. I let Julie use her creativity to
create any outdoor scene that she wanted to. I did not say anything to Julie during her drawing
process, but I did ask her questions as a follow up activity. This helped me to better understand
what she drew and why.

Findings
Julie drew grass, the sun, a flower with a lady bug on it, and a bee. She began by drawing
a ground line with a green crayon and then proceeded to fill in the bottom one-sixth of her page
with the color. This was Julies representation of grass. Then, Julie drew a yellow semi-circle in

Analysis of Developmental Progression in Art and Education

!4

the top left corner of her page, and made sun rays or little lines coming out from it. Next, she
drew yellow circle in the middle of her page, and drew a smaller brown circle on top of it. Julie
then made red bumps around the outside of the larger, yellow circle in order to create what she
wanted to be a flower shape. Julie colored in her red flower petals, but was not able to stay inside
her outlining or fill in the entire area so that no white paper was showing through. Julies next
step was to draw a stem connecting the flower to the grass with her brown crayon. Finally, Julie
added a (very large) bumblebee and a ladybug on her flower. The final product was nothing out
of the ordinary, but it was Julies individualized representation of outside. When questioning
Julie about her work, she even told me that her picture was just a regular, everyday
representation of the outdoors.
Earlier, I mentioned that I have classified this drawing as representing Brittain and
Lowenfelds (1970) Preschematic Stage. Individually, each object drawn is a relatively accurate
one-dimensional representation of what Julie intended it to be. However, as a whole, the objects
do not depict realistic size proportions or dimensions in relation to each other. Brittain and
Lowenfeld (1970) state that drawings that the size of objects in Preschematic drawings are not
in proportion to one another, and that they are distorted to fit the space available. In Julies
drawing, her sun is as large as her flower, which is only slightly larger than her bee. In reality,
these three objects are entirely different sizes, and do not even come close to having the same
dimensions. Individually, each object drawn is a relatively accurate one-dimensional
representation of what Julie intended it to be. However, as a whole, the objects do not depict
realistic size proportions or dimensions in relation to each other. Another characteristic of
Brittain and Lowenfelds (1970) Preschematic stage that Julies drawing represents is the use of

Analysis of Developmental Progression in Art and Education

!5

shapes that are geometric and lose their meaning when removed from the whole. If Julies
lines, circles, and ovals were removed from her drawing and separated, they would not represent
the same as her drawing in its entirety. There are several characteristics of Julies picture that fall
within the next stage, but because some skills have still not graduated past the Preschematic
stage, that is where Julies development will be categorized.
The experts and authors that my Art for Children classmates and I have reviewed would
agree with my findings. As Wilson and Wilson (1982) wrote, It is true that one human mind is
structured in was fundamentally the same as every other human mind; therefore it follows that all
humans approach the same basic tasks in essentially the same ways. Although Brittain and
Lowenfeld have been criticized and questioned for their classifications of young childrens art,
Wilson and Wilson recognized that there are certain processes that all children are naturally
inclined to use, without first being prompted or shown these basic strategies. Another expert in
the field of art education who demonstrates agreement with this principle, Kellogg, there are
twenty basic scribbles that are the building blocks of art, and are elementary line formations that
may be found in any young childs drawing (1970). Julies drawing still demonstrates many of
these simple line and scribble structures, without representing a more advanced final picture.
Each of these childrens art specialists opinions seem to support the idea that in the earliest
stages of artistic development, children combine basic shapes and lines to create their individual
representations of objects in drawings.
Conclusion
In Julies case, she right on track with her recommended age level development stage.
Preschematic artists are categorized as children ages four to seven years old. The next stage is

Analysis of Developmental Progression in Art and Education

!6

Schematic drawing, recommended for children ages seven to nine years old. Julie is seven years
old, and her drawing still represents some characteristics of a Preschematic drawing, so she is
right on track with other children her age. Julies drawing does represent some key Schematic
stage elements, like bold, direct, flat representations and an established baseline on which
objects are placed (Brittain and Lowenfeld, 1970). The fact that Julies picture depicts some of
these Schematic elements means that she is progressing in her development, and that the teacher
should not have concerns about her growth at this point in time. As a teacher, I will encourage
Julie to try to make more realistic drawings and to try to make her representations look more like
a photograph of the object rather than an illustration. This may help Julie to think about how she
can increase the accuracy of her drawings to and add more details that are true to reality. Art
analysis in the classroom can help teachers to evaluate where their students are developmentally.
Students whos drawings are more simplistic than their peers may be behind in their overall
development, and may struggle with other core subjects as well. Proper monitoring and
encouragement of artistic opportunities in the classroom are highly beneficial to all students and
teachers, and can ensure the continued academic and creative growth of all children.

Analysis of Developmental Progression in Art and Education

References
Brittain, W. L., & Lowenfeld, V. (1970). Creative and mental growth. New York: Macmillan.
Eisner, E. (2009). What education can learn from the arts. Art Education, 62(2), 7-9.
Kellogg, R. (1970). Analyzing childrens art. Palo Alto, CA: National.
Wilson, B., & Wilson, M. (1982). Teaching children to draw. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: PrenticeHall.

!7