:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
題名:蓋迪藝術教育中心對於DBAE理論之研究、實驗和推廣
書刊名:師大學報
作者:郭禎祥
出版日期:1989
卷期:34
頁次:頁389-410
主題關鍵詞:DBAE理論蓋迪藝術教育中心
原始連結:連回原系統網址new window
相關次數:
  • 被引用次數被引用次數:期刊(2) 博士論文(1) 專書(0) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:2
  • 共同引用共同引用:15
  • 點閱點閱:19
"藝術教育應該要更務實、更嚴謹、也更富於知性。在蓋迪藝術教育中心,藝術教育重獲生機,也有新的定義"。(Duke, 1984) 本文有鑑於蓋迪藝術中心對資助並推廣「以學科為基礎的藝術教育」理論的研究有所支持與貢獻而影響美加地區當今藝術教育活動發展的趨勢。因此將蓋迪藝術教育中心做一簡介,並探討其對DBAE理論之研究,實驗與推廣的狀況以供我國改革藝術教育之參考與指標。 傳統的思想認為藝術教育不是一項有目標而實質的教學課程。藝術教育對一個孩子的完整教育之重要性,從來就不被眾人所接受,而藝術所蘊含的知識和這種知識有助於瞭解人類之價值也受到同樣的忽視。晚近,若干有關國民教育的研究對這個傳統思想產生質疑。其中有好幾個研究承認藝術對教育的貢獻,並建議把藝術列入一般課程裡。J. Paul Getty Trust這個私人經營的信託基金會,認為上述的言論是和學校當局以及藝術團體共同來改善藝術教育品質的好機會。蓋迪中心以下列兩大前提為其活動的主導:一、由於藝術是文化的寶庫,學習藝術是瞭解人類的經驗和傳承文化價值的一個根本基礎;二、個人若沒有學習藝術,他的教育就不算完整。三、如果大眾所知和學校所教的藝術要有重大改變,我們必須對藝術的教學和如何教,有更完整的瞭解。 一個有實質意義的藝術課程,應當輔導兒童瞭解產生藝術的歷史和文化背景,也應該輔導他們認識美在自然界,在人為的環境裡,以及在藝術作品中的特質。還應該讓他們有機會創造自己的作品。同時鼓勵他們敘述,分析以及詮釋藝術作品。以上這些層面對於完成一項更完整、嚴謹的藝術課程都是必要的。 從過去五年半來蓋迪藝術教育中心在藝術教育所做的研究發展活動,我們可以預期其將來的走向及目標,藝術是我們和他人溝通我們對人生之領悟的方法。我們在藝術作品裡注入、表達我們的希望、恐懼和價值。我們對世界的看法和我們彼此的關係都反映在我們的藝術作品裡。我們確定我們需要藝術,因為藝術讓我們分享那些無法言傳,但卻肯定我們人情事故的感知。我們也確定,如果藝術要恢復它的生機,以便在通才教育的主流裡受人敬重,那麼它必須重做界定,要把美感、藝術史、藝術評論、以及藝術創作與表現的活動包括在內。那就是蓋迪藝術教育中心的中心目標。
The Getty Center for Education in the Arts, an operating unit of the J. Paul Getty Trust, established the 1983 and 1984 Institutes for Educators on the visual Arts to explore the introduction of discipline-based art programs into elementary schools of the United States. Leilani Lattin Duke, the Director of the Getty Center, has stressed that study of the arts should be an integral part of all children's education. The origin of the J. Paul Getty Trust was set up by its founder as a private operating foundation. Unlike a grant-making foundation, which funds the programs of others, the primary purpose of the Getty is to create and operate its own programs. The Center's stated mission is to improve the quality and status of arts education in America's schools. To bring about any significant change in the way the public perceives art and in the way teachers teach it, we need a more comprehensive under-standing of how and why the arts are taught. The Center had two components, summer staff-development programs for school-district personnel and year-long curriculum implementation programs. The designers hoped that participants would view art education as fostering understanding and appreciation of serious works of art and view art as an educative force and cultural necessity. They expected participants subsequently to teach their students to encounter serious works of art in meaningful ways and to establish programs offering balanced art instruction in aesthetics, studio production, art criticism, and art history. Today, we believe it is demonstrably evident that the discipline-based approach is becoming acceptable nationwide as the new standard for art education, the goals of the Center for DBAE are virtually identical to the aims stated by the National Art Education Association for achieving "Quality Art Education." In the past five and a half years the Getty Center for Education on the visual Arts has made a notable beginning toward achieving one of the goals of the J. Paul Getty Trust: enhancement of the public's understanding and appreciation of the visual arts. As the Trust looks to the future, it anticipates preparing a generation of students who will provide leadership for greater involvement in, and understanding of, the arts in their communities. As the Center becomes more experienced, it will learn more about where and how the Getty Center can help improve the status of education in the arts. The arts are a means of communicating with others, the very essence of our understanding of life. Our hopes, fears, and values are infused into our works of art. Our views of the world and our relationships to each other are reflected in our arts. We are certain that we need the arts because they permit us to share perceptions that cannot be expressed verbally but nevertheless affirm our common sense of humanity. If education in the arts is to be revitalized so that it can find a place of respect in the mainstream of general education, then it needs to be redefined to include aesthetic perception, art history, art criticism, along with creative and expres-sive activities. All this is the central purpose at the Getty Center for Education in the Arts.
期刊論文
1.郭禎祥、楊須美(19880600)。以艾斯納(E. W. Eisner)「學術本位的美術教育」(DBAE)為理論基礎探討現今我國國民美術教育。師大學報,33,575-593。new window  延伸查詢new window
2.Greer, W. D.(1984)。Discipline-based art education: Approaching art as a subject of study。Studies in Art Education,25(4),212-218。  new window
3.Welter, C. H.(1987)。Discipline-Based Art Education: Not If, but Where?。Design for Arts in Education,89(2),22-28。  new window
4.Greer, W. D.、Silverman, R. H.(1988)。Making Art Import for Every Child。Educational Leadership,45(4)。  new window
5.Greer, W. D.、Rush, J. C.、Feinstein, H.(1986)。The Getty Institutes: Putting Educational Theory into Practice。The Journal of Aesthetic Education,20(1),85-95。  new window
6.Clark, G. A.、Day, M. D.、Greer, W. D.(1987)。Discipline-Based Art Education: Becoming Students of Art。Aesthetic Education,21(2)。  new window
7.Duke, L. L.(1988)。The Getty Center for Education in the Arts and Disciplines-Based Art Education。Art Education,41(2),7-12。  new window
8.Eisner, E. W.(1987)。The Role of Discipline-Based Art Education in America's Schools。Art Education,40(5),6-45。  new window
9.Greer, W. D.、Rush, J. C.(1985)。A Grand Experiment: The Getty Institutes for Educators on the Visual Arts。Art Education,38(1),24+33-35。  new window
10.Duke, L. L.(1984)。The Getty Center for Education in the Arts。Phi Delta Kappan,65(9)。  new window
11.Price, M. J.(1987)。Foreword。Journal of Aesthetic Education,21(2)。  new window
12.Duke, L. L.(1983)。The Getty Center for Education in the Arts。Art Education,36(5),4-8。  new window
13.Eisner, E. W.(1984)。Alternative approaches to curriculum development in art education。Studies in Art education,25(4),259-264。  new window
會議論文
1.Schmitt, L. M.(1985)。The State of the Getty Projects and Plans of the J. Paul Getty Trust。IFLA General Conference。Division on Special Libraries, Section on Art Libraries, International Federation of Library Associations。  new window
圖書
1.Broudy, H. S.(1987)。The role of imagery in learning。Los Angeles, California:The Getty Center for Education in the Arts。  new window
2.歐用生(1986)。課程發展的基本原理。高雄:復文書局。  延伸查詢new window
3.黃炳煌(1986)。課程理論之基礎。臺北:文景出版社。  延伸查詢new window
4.王文科(1988)。課程論。臺北市:五南圖書公司。  延伸查詢new window
5.Tyler, R. W.、黃炳煌(1986)。課程與教學的基本原理。臺北市:桂冠圖書股份有限公司。  延伸查詢new window
6.Barkan, M.(1955)。A foundation for art education。New York:The Ronald Press Company。  new window
7.Ammar, K. S. S.(1982)。A Critical Review of Articles in Studies in Art Education Relating to Teaching Methods and Strategies。The University of Arizona。  new window
8.Eisner, E. W.(1972)。Education Artistic Visual。New York:Harper & Row Publishers。  new window
9.Getty Center(1985)。Art history, Art criticism, and Art production: An Examination of Art Education in Selected School Districts。Rand Corporation。  new window
10.Getty Center(1984)。Beyond Creating: The Place for Art in America's Schools。  new window
11.Getty Center(1987)。Discipline-Based Art Education: What Forms Will It Take?。Getty Center。  new window
12.Duke, L. L.(1984)。Art history, Art criticism, and Art production: An Examination of Art Education in Selected School Districts。Rand Corporation。  new window
13.林寶山(1984)。國家在危機之中--美國的教育改革計劃。復文圖書出版社。  延伸查詢new window
14.Anne, D. J.(1985)。Use of Discipline-Based Art Curriculum in Correctional Institutions。The University of Arizona。  new window
15.黃政傑(1985)。課程改革。台北:漢文。  延伸查詢new window
圖書論文
1.徐南號(1978)。初等教育的課程與方法的現代化。教育原理。偉文書局。  延伸查詢new window
2.Boyer, E. L.(1984)。The Art, Language and the Schools。Art history, Art Criticism, and Art production。Rand Corporation。  new window
3.Boyer, E. L.(1985)。Art as Language: Its Places in the Schools。Beyond Creating: The Place for Art in America's Schools。Getty Center。  new window
4.Boyer, E. L.(1987)。The Arts, Language, and the Schools。Discipline-Based Art Education: What Forms Will it Take?。Getty Center。  new window
5.Eisner, E. W.(1987)。Structure and Magic in Discipline-Based Art Education。Discipline-Based Art Education: What Forms Will It Take?。Getty Center。  new window
6.Eisner, E. W.(1984)。Why art in education and why art education。Art history, Art criticism, and Art production。Rand Corporation。  new window
7.黃政傑(1985)。我國教育部課程行政的檢討與改進。教育行政比較研究。臺北:臺灣書店。  延伸查詢new window
8.Barkan, M.(1986)。Curriculum problems in art education。A seminar in art education for research and curriculum development。University Park, Pennsylvania:Pennsylvania State University。  new window
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
QR Code
QRCODE