Teaching art or teaching to think like an artist? | Cindy Foley | TEDxColumbus

This talk was given at a TEDx event using the TED conference format but independently organized by a local community. Learn more at http://ted.com/tedx

What is the purpose and value of art education in the 21st century? Foley makes the case the art's critical value is to develop learners that think like artists which means learners who are creative, curious, that seek questions, develop ideas, and play. For that to happen, society will need to stop the pervasive, problematic, and cliché messaging that implies that creativity is somehow defined as artistic skill. This shift in perception will give educators the courage to teach for creativity by focusing on three critical habits that artists employ: comfort with ambiguity, idea generation, and transdisciplinary research. This change can make way for centers for creativity in our schools and museums where ideas are king and curiosity reigns.

Cindy Meyers Foley is the Executive Assistant Director and Director of Learning and Experience at the Columbus Museum of Art. Foley worked to reimagine the CMA as a 21st century institution that is transformative, active, and participatory. An institution that impacts the health and growth of the community by cultivating, celebrating and championing creativity.

We are going to get started
with some kindergarten image-word match.

I would like each of you to determine

what is the word that matches
the image in number seven.

Starting to come up with some ideas?

Good.

Get them in your head
because I want to share with you

what my daughter Adeline chose.

(Laughter)

Adeline chose 'art,'

and as her parent,
I thought that was awesome,

but this is an incorrect answer
according to the testing guide.

The correct answer is 'mud,'
and I'm sure that's what you all chose.

Right, right?

How can something
so nebulous be so concrete?

Actually, I think this quiz
is a fitting analogy

for the problem in art education today.

Art education has been impacted

by the standards and testing culture
like all other disciplines,

and in a lot of ways, we've been focusing
on teaching things that are concrete.

Things like elements of art,
art history, and foundational skills.

In essence, we're teaching things
that we can test and assess.

But I believe art education needs to focus

on developing learners
that think like artists.

Learners who are creative, curious,
seek questions, develop ideas, and play,

which means we need
to be much more intentional

about how we communicate
art's critical value

and how we teach for creativity.

So, creativity - let's do
a little case making around this.

Most of this you know.

Creativity is being touted
by business leaders like the folks at IBM,

by educational reformists,

by economists, even folks as Dan Pink

as the number one thing we need

for student success,
economic growth, and general happiness.

We also know the creativity scores
in this country are on the decline,

that Torrance creativity test,
which has been administered for decades,

has now shown, since the 1990s, a decline,

especially in ages 6 to 12
in the United States.

We also know due to Sir Kenneth
Robinson's now famous TED Talk

that schools are
fundamentally and foundationally

challenged to cultivate creativity.

But I'm going to share
with you some research

that the Wallace Foundation did
with Harvard's Project Zero

in which they found the number one thing
quality art education can do is develop

"the capacity to think creatively
and the capacity to make connections."

So then why is there such a disconnect

between creativity and art education?

I think there's actually
a couple of reasons why.

But we are going to focus on
communication and messaging.

Those of us in the field
have been working

to really move art education
out of a defensive place.

We've been trying to make
a case for our own existence,

and we're trying to move it more
towards an offensive message

especially around creativity.

But we're not there yet,

and so, we're going to place that
for another talk, at another time.

Instead, I want to focus on a message

I think is much more
problematic and pervasive -

and I hate to put you on the spot,

but I actually feel you are to blame.

I mean, not you per se,
but you as a group of people

who actually really support art education

Let me give some context.

As a parent, I often hear adults
saying things to children,

as well as to other adults,
and to the educators,

things like this,

"Oh, my goodness! Look how well
you've drawn that horse!

It's so realistic! You're so creative!"

You've heard messages like that before?

Here's another one
I think I hear almost daily,

"Oh, Cindy! I really support
art education.

It is very important!
I mean, I'm not creative.

I don't have a creative bone in my body.
I can't even draw a stick figure."

(Laughter)

These messages are incredibly
problematic and the more ...

You may not think they are a big deal,

but the more society pushes them out

and continues to foster

these cliche notions
of what is creativity,

the harder it is
for those in the field, like me,

to begin moving
towards teaching for creativity.

Teaching for creativity.
What do I mean by that?

I believe teaching for creativity is
embodying the habits the artists employ.

Habits in particular, there are three

that I think are essential to creativity.

They are: one - comfort with ambiguity,

two - idea generation,
and three - transdisciplinary research.

We're going to talk
about those in a moment,

but first, we're going to do
a little audience participation.

I would like each of you
to use something on your person:

paper, pencil, your program,
phone, glasses; it doesn't matter.

And I'd like you -
you'll just get a couple of minutes -

to actually create something
that represents the idea of metaphor.

Go ahead.

(indistinct chatter in the audience)

Alright. Be honest.

How many of you had a surge of panic
when I just asked you to do that?

(Laughter)

I want you to savor that sensation.

You actually are off the hook,

but I want you to savor
that sensation for a moment.

What you just experienced is, I think,
the number one obstacle to creative work:

that discomfort,

and that discomfort
is ambiguity, it's not-knowing.

I actually learned this
from a group of teachers.

We'd been working with them,
and they told us, "You know what?

We find that it's really difficult

to engage our students in creative work,
in particular, open-ended projects.

It just makes it really hard."

Ironically enough, later that afternoon,
we had that same group of teachers,

and we gave them a challenge
similar to the one I just gave you.

Interestingly enough, almost immediately,

a couple of them announced
they needed to leave for the day.

(Laughter)

Another group needed
a break at that moment,

and still, others stayed in the classroom

but refused to participate
in the activity.

What we realized

is students struggle with ambiguity
because we all do.

Artists, on the other hand, realize
that ambiguity is part of the process.

They take it, they identify it,
and they tackle it head on.

If artists are doing this,
can't you imagine

if art education was a place

where we knew students could go
to prepare for lives of not knowing?

I work at the Columbus Museum of Art,
and for years now,

we provided the kind of art education
that our community requested.

So for example, when we had an exhibition
of the work of Claude Monet,

we taught about his history,

we allowed folks to experiment
with his materials and his process,

and then, we finally
would create lesson plans

and allow others to do the same.

In essence, what we were doing

was generating content
and allowing folks to make mini-Monets.

But then it dawned on us

we were not actually engaging them
in what made Monet Monet.

And that was the way he thought;
Monet's ideas were revolutionary.

He questioned the natural world,
the way we see,

he questioned the politics of the time,

and that's what made
his work so exceptional.

It was at this moment we realized

we needed to be teaching
for idea generation.

So I'm going to have you jump with me now
from one artist to another.

(Laughter)

The Lego movie gave us such a gift
when they presented the movie this summer.

More or less, what they said

was creativity is not the Lego kid
in the direction booklet

but creativity is the bucket of Legos
and the potential for ideas within.

Legos are just another material
like drawing materials

to help us make ideas manifest.

What I loved about this movie

was the idea of the master builder

or the person who has
the courage to have ideas.

But it dawned on me, in much of education,
the master builders are the educators.

They're the ones who have ideas,
great lesson plans.

But students are secondary
to that process.

Students are often
more of the artist's assistant,

or sometimes, even just the factory worker
getting the project done.

Visualize a classroom
full of master builders,

a classroom full
of master builders at play.

Yes, play. Play is essential.

Play is a surefire way
to kickstart ideation.

Artists play.

They play in a number of ways.

They either play with materials
until ideas begin to manifest

or they play with ideas

until they realize what media or materials
they need to bring that into reality.

Imagine an art education
where educators were comfortable

with the ambiguous classroom

where student ideas
and interests lead the learning.

So I need to be honest with you:

nothing in my career,
my education, or my teaching

has influenced my thinking
as much as being married to an artist.

I am married to Sean Foley,

and what I can tell you about artists
is that they're voracious researchers.

They will research anything -
bizarre things.

And what I've learned

is that they'll do anything
that furthers their thinking.

Let me give you an example.

About ten years ago, Sean had this idea

that if painting were dead
what if he were doctor Frankenstein?

He immediately rereads Mary Shelley.
He rewatches all the classic horror films.

He then devours books at the library

on natural history, history
of medicine, anomalies of nature.

He then starts purchasing
taxidermic animals.

(Laughter)

But then, he informs me
that we need to go to London.

He must go to London in order to study
the museums of the pre-Enlightenment,

and in particular,
the early operating theaters.

So in essence, his research manifest,

and Sean ends up making
monsters of his own, like this one.

So what Sean was engaged in
is transdisciplinary research

or research that serves curiosity.

Imagine if the future of education
was not about discrete disciplines

but rather was about disciplines
like math, art, and science

being in service to ideas.

What kind of spaces might we create
in order to foster that type of thinking?

Could we create centers for creativity

where we cultivate, champion,
and measure this type of thinking?

I don't want you for a minute
to stop championing art education,

but I do want you to be thoughtful
about the chant.

When we say we want creativity
in our schools, we often say,

"Don't kill the arts,"

But today, I want that battle cry
to address art's critical value,

"Don't kill the ideas."

I want my own children
to think like artists

no matter what career path
they may choose.

I believe art education is essential
for 21st century learning.

And with your help, we can flip
the counterproductive messaging

and allow our educators
to develop centers for creativity

where ideas are king and curiosity reigns.

Thank you.

(Applause)