Hickman, Richard. (2005). Why We Make Art and Why It Is Taught. Reviewed by Stephanie Baer, University of Nebraska, Lincoln

Hickman, Richard. (2005). Why We Make Art and Why It Is Taught. Bristol, UK: Intellect Books Pp. 175         ISBN 1-84150-126-3 Reviewed by Stephanie Baer University of Nebraska, Lincoln September 10, 2008 Advocacy for the necessity and vitality of art-making in education is alive and well, embodied in the writing of Richard Hickman. His book, Why We Make Art and Why It Is Taught, reminds readers of the importance of the arts within education and the significant connections the arts hold for the development of young minds. Hickman is currently at the University of Cambridge in the Faculty of Education. He is an accomplished artist, educator, and scholar and his book reflects the intersections of these areas of expertise and his passionate commitment to the necessity of the arts in our lives. His profile can be accessed on his faculty webpage at: http://www.educ.cam.ac.uk/people/staff/hickman/. Hickman’s book is thoughtfully put together. The act of creating as a fundamental human endeavor is the primary thesis. Hickman explores this thesis broadly, with his book speaking not only to those specifically interested in the arts, but also to those seeking to create more vivid teaching/learning experiences across all disciplines and interests. The book is organized into sections drawing on varied perspectives and traditions, but always returning to Hickman’s primary thesis of the necessity of creating spaces for creativity. Each section provides much fodder for the importance of artists and art educators refocusing their efforts and attention on the significances of the creative act of making art. Collectively, the sections map out the field at large and reveal the tensions and pulls that have influenced the paths taken. As someone new to the field, I gained insights and an appreciation of the historical understandings at play and continuing to permeate art and art education discourses today. And, I found myself embracing his call to restore to creativity its catalytic power within art education. Section One, Art and Art Education, addresses the very nature of human development and how our minds form as growing children and young adults. Situating his discussions within historical traditions, ‘the place of ‘knowing and understanding’ art is initially addressed. Hickman speaks from first hand knowledge of the English National Curriculum documentation using this experience as a concrete example. He discusses changes in that knowledge and understanding of how art should be taught in school, navigating through the roles of studio practice to subject-centered approaches and student-centered approaches. Readers are clued into how one idea may have led to the next. For example, Dwaine Greer’s curriculum of ‘discipline-based art education’ in America is briefly sketched in relation to the United Kingdom’s curriculum reflecting Brian Allison’s ‘domains’ in art: Expressive/Productive, Perceptual, Analytical/Critical, Historical/Cultural. Through this analytic journey, Hickman encourages a continued search for art education tenets. He articulates that what we have encountered thus far is perhaps ‘misguided’ and focused too heavily on ‘cognitive rather than affective aspects of art…a curriculum that is not aimed at the needs of individual young people but is the result of a perceived, but to my mind misguided, need to give a kind of academic respectability to art in schools.’ (p. 18) In the latter part of the opening section Hickman moves on to child developmental theories and issues in art education, with a broad sweep of reigning canons that exist within developmental psychology examined. Leading into ‘intellectual development and understanding,’ Hickman compares and contrasts the ideas of Victor Lowenfeld, Howard Gardner and A. Housen within artistic development. He alludes to concerns with procedures that have been a part of some long term studies within art education. For example, he addresses Michael Parsons’ long-term study in 1983 which brought light to human developmental changes in response to art. While Hickman finds purpose in the study, he expresses a need to reconsider the findings in light of wider contextual understandings regarding the arts. The discussion returns us back to an earlier topic of how far do we go to ‘give status’ to the arts within the curriculum? Do we restrict exposure to the arts in hopes of a deeper understanding, or do we cast a wider net, creating a more open experience with the arts? To conclude the first section, Hickman returns to a more historical discussion concerning the nature of art education and how it has evolved in several countries. Section Two, Conversations and Reflections – Some ‘Mini Case-Studies,’ turns to Hickman’s own autobiographical reflection, asserting the importance of affective awareness in the creative process. He makes no qualms about communicating the personal emotive charge involved in art-making and its infrequent appearance in our educational systems. I found myself pausing as I read and affirming Hickman’s continuous efforts striving for connections across his research and the thinking of many other artists and art educators, expressing his voice in a open, honest account of his findings. This sincerity is even more apparent in ‘People talking about their art-making’ following his autobiographical reflection. In this part we get a short case study of each person and their situation followed by a direct accounting of their art and at times, an image personally created. Following each person’s account, Hickman proceeds to make connections as to how their situation reflects upon their art-making and visa-versa, asserting a deep commitment to creating an inclusive art-making environment. As seen in his interviewing (questions available in Appendix IV), Hickman seeks to reveal a more holistic look at the artist and their art-making. He not only gives validation to what his interviewees were creating but found connections within their lives to give purpose and meaning to their explanations. I believe these mini case-studies illustrate his primary thesis even further through the testimonies of individual art-makers and the nexus of their creations. Section Three, Issues in Art and Learning, surfaces persistent issues of importance to teachers and learners. These include the nature and role of artistic personality, creating aesthetic significance, imagination and expression, identity, and creativity. He also includes a portion considering again ‘art and schooling’ which could be treated as the beginning of his synthesizing remarks thus far. In order to address all of these issues, Hickman refers to the ‘mini-case studies’ from section two. Armed with direct conversations with individuals in the midst of art-making, he reiterates the importance of a well-considered art education by way of considering human existence. Within a dialogue between John Dupre, Professor of Philosophy and Howard Gardner considering artistic personality and whether artists are born or made, Hickman interjects an arresting argument: My argument is that what some might term "exceptional talent" or "giftedness" in art is largely culturally determined, while the desire and potential for art-making is innate. Moreover, the abilities to appreciate visual form, to have a concept of beauty and to value it are all intrinsic to human makeup. What is wonderful in nature is not that there is some divine hand that has made the world beautiful with sunsets, rainbows, waterfalls and the like, but that we have the capacity to perceive these things as beautiful. Art objects – things made significant by human hand – are made to be the focus of our aesthetic attention by having a pleasing and/or arresting form and are often complex enough in various ways to incite that other important characteristic in people: curiosity. (pp. 98-99) He goes on to emphasize the innateness of curiosity and the human capacity to invent or create that is present in all of us. "Curiosity is fundamental to learning and it is this faculty that needs to be exercised if we are to live lives that are rich, significant and meaningful." (p. 99) Hickman touches on many deep and complex issues briefly while keeping a momentum toward a better understanding of why art-making is vital and significant in the lives of children. In both section two after the case studies and in this section, Hickman refers to authentic self-expression and its connection to self-esteem. He supports this assertion through noting research of pupils as well as teachers. He also comments on the prevalence of positive self-esteem and confidence taking place already within art classrooms saying, ‘I am not simply resurrecting stereotypes here but reasserting the importance of the individual student and the difference that teachers can make if they are enthusiastic about their subject and value students in a way that is reflected in the ambience of the teaching space. Successful art teachers and the way that many create a special learning atmosphere can be seen as models for others.’ (p. 109) Hickman concludes this section by taking the opportunity to bring forth testimonies concerning the current educational climate. Several students, along with current academic researchers, are quoted with less than positive reviews of the direction of education. Hickman makes connections to earlier discussions, advocating for considering art schools and art classrooms as models for all education. Section Four, Concluding Chapter, brings summation to the book highlighting and revisiting topics such as: art as a fundamental human urge, concept learning, drawing, the art curriculum, appreciation of visual form, assessment, and the art room as a model. Hickman includes five appendices that further inform the reader concerning current practice and research in art education. These appendices include: Coding system used for determining levels of understanding in art, General education aims and the role of art in education (Adapted from K. Lansing), ‘Some worthwhile outcomes…’ (from M. Barrett), Prompt questions (Used by Hickman for mini-case studies), and a Questionnaire on aims for art and design in education. All of these are discussed in the text and show Hickman’s interest in continuing and contributing to the art education conversation rather than simply reporting on it. Hickman’s consideration of why we make art and why it is taught asserts his support for the creative potential inherent within art education. He doesn’t resort to championing one canon over another, nor does he completely discount any research he has addressed. His open and honest considerations of topics addressed create a much-needed space for discussion within the realm of education. If more educators could gain this clarity of vision through imaginative consideration, our educative systems might one day reflect the imaginings of an artist. And to that end, we might embrace our innate curiosity and allow ourselves the opportunity to see our world differently and perhaps, with the artistry and imagination Hickman knows and seeks for all. References Barrett, M. (1982). Art education: A strategy for course design. London: Heinemann. Lansing, K. (1971). Art, artists and art education. New York: McGraw-Hill. About the Reviewer Stephanie Baer is a doctoral student at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln in Teacher Education and the Editorial Assistant for the International Journal of Education and the Arts. She has worked as a classroom teacher in the arts and has taught art methods for pre-service elementary teachers. Her research interests are aesthetics, interdisciplinary education, creativity and motivation, professional development, and of course, the arts in whatever form they may live.