Journal of Educational Practice for Social Change 2012 | Page 6

so much less understood in comparison with traditionally “core”, standardized test-focused school
subjects. The issues and confusion arise when the excellently conceived assessment plans meet real life
in arts classrooms.
In this essay I narrow the scope of “arts education” and focus primarily on my main area of
experience and research—the visual arts. As a public school teacher (for the majority of my career) as
well as private school art teacher who has loved the adventure of teaching pre-school through college
level students throughout my career, I can speak from years of experience. But I also work with
teachers in other arts areas and have taught other branches of the arts, so I feel a deep kinship with my
fellow arts educators, and I have an appreciation for the many overlaps we experience in our arts
classrooms. With this in mind, I invite the reader to freely extend and apply “art education” problems
to all the arts subjects. More often than not, the applications will find a good fit.
Reality Checks in a Real Art Classroom
My most relied-upon assessment tools do in fact work fairly well, but we never strive for “fairly
well” in schools. Let us get pragmatic for a moment and take a look at what works to a certain extent.
The art project rubric that one of my colleagues found online years ago (referred to above) is my
best friend on multiple levels. Its four components are easy to score. The first is Class work—is the
student on time, do they follow class rules, clean up after themselves? (25 pts.) Next is Accuracy—does
the student understand the concepts of the lesson, are the overall directions and parameters adhered
to? (25 pts.) Then comes Effort—is the work being attempted? Is the student learning new things
through the assignment? Is there evidence of energy, engagement, and enthusiasm shown each day?
(25 pts.) The fourth and final category is the one many students fear being the ultimate gradedeterminer: Quality. Here, traditional measures of what constitutes good art come into play—strong
design, creativity, originality, and presentation (25 pts.)
This little rubric is my go-to buddy because it not only satisfies my supervisors’ requirement to
use rubrics across all subject areas, it also explains what “counts” (effort trumps talent) to my
demanding students’ (and their parents’) satisfaction, and demonstrates why a hard-working,
enthusiastic classmate who doesn’t produce a masterpiece can get a better grade than a no-show,
disrespectful bully who mocks others’ work, but turns in an impressive, if off-assignment, artwork a
week late. Still, with all its attributes, the rubric cannot serve as the needed stand-alone performance
piece for the official records.
Portfolios are also a powerful ally for me. If Shakespeare’s observation that “A picture is worth
a thousand words” ever applied well to something, it is in the use of portfolios for assessment.
Viewing pupils’ progress over time (as seen in the evolution of their portfolio artwork collections) says
it all, doesn’t it? Here, we can study the development of their skills, range, style, and interests--and
even note their rubric scores and handwritten notes from the teacher! Every art teacher I have known
or observed in the course of my student visitations utilizes portfolios. Could they be the Holy Grail we
seek as our art students’ high stakes “performance piece?” In my humble opinion, the answer to that
question is a resounding “Yes!”, but even as I voice it, questions of subjectivism return to tarnish the
validity of this arts assessment.
In an attempt to address this persistent and very arts-specific problem, non-arts supervisors
and principals frequently recommend adding student-written descriptions and explanations to their
art pieces in order to help support the understanding and verification of an artwork’s meaning and
6