Yavelberg dissertation final
Hoàn thành luận văn Yavelberg. Tóm tắt nghiên cứu, phân tích kết quả và đề xuất hướng phát triển tương lai.
Năm xuất bản
Số trang
320
Thời gian đọc
48 phút
Lượt xem
0
Lượt tải
0
Phí lưu trữ
60 Point
Tổng quan nhanh
- Chủ đề:
- Discovering Art History Pedagogy: Yavelberg Dissertation Insights
- Số trang:
- 320 trang
- Trường:
- George Mason University
- Chuyên ngành:
- Education
- Tác giả:
- Josh Yavelberg
- Năm:
- 2016
Tóm tắt nội dung luận án
I.Discovering Art History Pedagogy Yavelberg Dissertation Insights
This Yavelberg dissertation explores the pedagogical paradigm within introductory art history survey courses. The research employs a Delphi study methodology. It identifies inherent teaching and learning structures. The study addresses the challenge of effective art history education. It seeks to uncover expert consensus. This consensus pertains to course content, skills, strategies, and assessments. The dissertation provides crucial insights for educators. It aims to enhance student comprehension and engagement. The findings contribute to a more robust curriculum design. This research builds upon existing literature gaps. It offers practical recommendations for future course development. The study highlights the evolving needs of 21st-century learners. It considers various delivery methods, including hybrid and online delivery. The ultimate goal is to optimize art history learning experiences. The research design involves multiple rounds of expert feedback. This process refines understanding of effective pedagogical practices. The dissertation serves as a foundational text for art history education reform.
1.1. Unpacking the Pedagogical Paradigm in Art History
The dissertation, by Josh Yavelberg, investigates the underlying teaching philosophy. It focuses on introductory art history survey courses. The research defines the existing pedagogical paradigm. This involves examining how art history is traditionally taught. It questions the effectiveness of current methods. The study seeks to identify core educational values. These values shape the learning experience for students. Understanding this paradigm is crucial for improvement. It helps pinpoint areas for innovation. The research explores the historical development of these courses. It considers their current status quo. The study analyzes the foundational principles guiding instructors. It provides a framework for evaluating teaching effectiveness. The findings offer a lens through which to view art history education. They inform discussions about curriculum evolution. The paradigm impacts student learning outcomes directly. This Yavelberg dissertation provides a deep dive into these educational structures.
1.2. The Delphi Study Approach to Educational Research
A Delphi study methodology drives this dissertation. This research method gathers expert opinions systematically. It involves several rounds of questionnaires. Each round refines the consensus among participants. Experts provide anonymous feedback. They then reconsider their responses based on group summaries. This process minimizes individual bias. It facilitates convergence on key issues. The Delphi technique is ideal for complex, ill-structured problems. Discovering a pedagogical paradigm fits this description. The method ensures a comprehensive exploration of diverse viewpoints. It identifies areas of strong agreement. It also highlights outlier opinions. The Yavelberg dissertation applies this rigorous approach. It validates the findings through expert consensus. This enhances the credibility of the research outcomes. The Delphi study provides a structured path to knowledge discovery in art history education.
II.Evaluating Course Challenges and Research Design Framework
Introductory art history survey courses face distinct challenges. This dissertation identifies these problems explicitly. The vast scope of art history creates difficulty. Students often struggle with comprehension and application. The research design addresses these inherent issues. It outlines a structured approach to problem-solving. The study establishes a clear method for inquiry. Limitations and delimitations are also defined. These boundaries ensure focused research. The design prioritizes objective data collection. It builds on a thorough review of existing literature. Gaps in previous research are identified. These gaps inform the study's specific objectives. The framework guides the entire investigation. It ensures a systematic exploration of the subject. This rigorous design strengthens the validity of the Yavelberg dissertation's conclusions. It offers a transparent path from problem statement to outcome analysis.
2.1. Examining Core Issues in Art History Pedagogy
The dissertation begins by detailing the problem statement. Introductory art history survey courses often struggle with student engagement. Issues include information overload and a lack of critical thinking skills. Traditional methods may not foster deep understanding. Students often memorize facts without true application. The disconnect between course content and real-world relevance poses a challenge. The Yavelberg dissertation seeks to address these pedagogical shortcomings. It identifies the need for improved teaching strategies. It highlights the importance of fostering higher-order thinking. This includes analysis, synthesis, and evaluation. The study also considers the impact of diverse student populations. Addressing these core issues is central to the research's purpose. It aims to transform passive learning into active, meaningful engagement. The research probes how to move beyond rote memorization effectively.
2.2. Robust Research Design and Method of Inquiry Details
The overview of the research design is comprehensive. It details the general study design. The method of inquiry is explicitly stated as a Delphi study. This design ensures expert input shapes the findings. The dissertation outlines data analysis procedures. This includes how expert responses are processed. Limitations and delimitations clarify the study's scope. These boundaries define what the research covers and excludes. The researcher's connection to the problem is also acknowledged. This provides context for the study's motivation. The design ensures a structured, replicable approach. It emphasizes ethical considerations and participant consent. The Yavelberg dissertation employs a systematic method. This provides a strong foundation for its conclusions. The research design aims for both rigor and practical relevance in art history education.
III.Essential Skills for Art History Survey Course Success
The Yavelberg dissertation identifies crucial skills for students. These skills are essential for success in art history survey courses. The research results highlight several key competencies. Experts emphasize comprehension, application, and analysis. Students must integrate information effectively. Learning how to learn is also a vital outcome. The study moves beyond basic knowledge acquisition. It prioritizes higher-order thinking skills. These include synthesis and evaluation. The human dimension of learning receives attention. Caring and empathy are recognized as important. Developing 21st Century Skills is paramount. Technological literacies are also integrated into the skill set. These findings guide educators toward holistic student development. They offer a blueprint for designing impactful learning objectives. The outcome results underscore the need for skill-focused pedagogy. This ensures students gain transferable abilities. Skill outliers provide unique perspectives on individual cases. These insights refine the understanding of diverse learning needs.
3.1. Cultivating Core Competencies for Art Historical Thinking
The study reveals critical skills for art history students. Comprehension of complex historical contexts is foundational. Students must apply theoretical frameworks to artworks. Analysis of visual elements and cultural impact is paramount. Integration of diverse information sources is also a key skill. Learning how to learn independently is another crucial outcome. The Yavelberg dissertation's findings stress active learning. It moves beyond passive reception of facts. Experts advocate for developing critical thinking. This includes problem-solving and conceptual understanding. These competencies prepare students for advanced study. They also foster a deeper appreciation of art. The research identifies a gap in current skill development. It pushes for more explicit teaching of these abilities. The study's skill-ranked results provide a clear hierarchy of importance. These outcomes offer practical guidance for curriculum developers.
3.2. Integrating 21st Century Skills and Technological Literacies
The dissertation emphasizes the integration of modern skills. 21st Century Skills are vital for today's students. These include critical thinking, creativity, and collaboration. Communication skills are also highly valued. Technological literacies are equally important in art history. Students need to navigate digital resources effectively. They must analyze digital images and online content critically. The study identifies these as essential for contemporary learning. The Yavelberg dissertation pushes for a forward-looking pedagogy. It moves beyond traditional analog methods. Experts advocate for digital fluency in art history. This prepares students for a technologically advanced world. The research explores how technology can enhance learning. It considers tools for research, presentation, and communication. The findings encourage educators to embrace digital tools proactively. This ensures students are well-equipped for future academic and professional endeavors.
IV.Effective Teaching Strategies for Art History Education
The Yavelberg dissertation provides a detailed exploration of teaching strategies. Experts identified numerous effective approaches. These strategies aim to enhance student engagement and learning. The findings offer a practical guide for art history instructors. The study considers various pedagogical options. These include chronological versus thematic approaches. Less-is-more strategies received significant attention. Participatory and student-driven models are also highlighted. Multi-modal engagement is another key finding. The research also identifies ineffective teaching strategies. This helps educators avoid counterproductive methods. The outcomes provide a comprehensive overview. They inform decisions about course delivery and design. The dissertation advocates for diverse teaching methods. It promotes active learning environments. These strategies aim to move beyond traditional lecture formats. Teaching strategy outliers offer unique perspectives. They suggest alternative pathways for instruction. The findings contribute to a richer pedagogical toolkit for art history educators.
4.1. Innovative Approaches to Art History Instruction
The study uncovers several innovative teaching strategies. A course blog or hybrid model facilitates ongoing engagement. Museum and gallery field trips offer experiential learning. A 'less-is-more' approach prioritizes depth over breadth. Participatory and student-driven learning empower students. Discussions around 'unknown artwork' stimulate critical inquiry. Multi-modal engagement caters to diverse learning styles. This includes visual, auditory, and kinesthetic activities. The Yavelberg dissertation highlights these methods. They move beyond passive lecture delivery. Experts endorse strategies that foster active student participation. These approaches aim to make learning more dynamic. They encourage students to construct their own understanding. The findings provide concrete examples for implementation. They suggest a shift towards more interactive pedagogy. The ranked results of teaching strategies guide educators toward best practices.
4.2. Evaluating Pedagogical Options and Delivery Methods
The dissertation evaluates a range of pedagogical options. It contrasts Western versus Global approaches to content. Chronological versus thematic structures are also examined. The use of textbooks versus Open Educational Resources is explored. The study also investigates different delivery methods. On-ground, hybrid, and online delivery models are considered. Each method has distinct implications for teaching. The research provides insights into their effectiveness. It assesses the role of technology in enhancing instruction. The Yavelberg dissertation offers a nuanced view. It recognizes that no single method suits all contexts. The findings encourage adaptability and thoughtful integration. Educators can select strategies based on specific learning objectives. This section provides a comprehensive menu of choices. It informs decisions about course format and resource selection. The study helps optimize the learning environment for art history students.
V.Innovating Art History Assessments Course Materials
The Yavelberg dissertation thoroughly examines course assignments and assessments. It identifies effective methods for evaluating student learning. The study moves beyond traditional multiple-choice exams. It advocates for authentic assessments. These include writing-intensive approaches. Research projects, creative reinterpretations, and critical analysis essays are highlighted. The findings also address course readings and resources. The use of primary source materials is emphasized. Open Educational Resources (OER) are presented as viable alternatives to traditional textbooks. These recommendations aim to align assessments with desired learning outcomes. They promote deeper engagement with course content. The dissertation provides a roadmap for designing more meaningful evaluations. It also suggests strategies for selecting relevant and accessible learning materials. Assignment and assessment outliers offer unique insights. They reveal diverse perspectives on student evaluation. The research encourages a holistic view of student achievement. It moves towards evaluations that reflect real-world skills. This comprehensive analysis supports innovation in art history pedagogy.
5.1. Designing Authentic Assessments for Deeper Learning
The dissertation details various effective assignments and assessments. Writing journals or blogs encourage ongoing reflection. Research projects, particularly on 'unknown' artworks, foster investigative skills. Analysis of personally viewable artistic artifacts promotes direct engagement. Creative re-interpretations allow for imaginative understanding. Comparison essays develop analytical and synthetic abilities. Critical analysis essays hone academic writing and argumentation. Art history games or role-playing activities enhance interactive learning. Group research projects foster collaboration. The Yavelberg dissertation advocates for these authentic assessments. They move beyond traditional standardized tests. The study acknowledges the role of multiple-choice, slide ID, and short-answer exams. However, it emphasizes a balanced approach. Authentic assessments align with 21st Century Skills. They encourage higher-order thinking and practical application. These findings provide a rich palette of assessment options.
5.2. Optimizing Course Readings and Educational Resources
The research scrutinizes course reading materials. It compares traditional survey textbooks with supplemental readings. A critical understanding of various historical viewpoints is emphasized. The use of primary source materials is strongly recommended. These sources offer direct engagement with historical evidence. Resources on how to write and research are also deemed important. Cultural identity and encountering others’ work receive attention. Open Educational Resources (OER) are presented as valuable alternatives. OER can reduce costs and increase accessibility. The Yavelberg dissertation encourages a diverse range of materials. It moves beyond a single textbook approach. The findings promote a critical engagement with resources. Students should evaluate sources effectively. Course reading outliers highlight unique preferences. These recommendations aim to enrich the learning experience. They ensure students access varied and relevant information. The study informs decisions on selecting and utilizing course content effectively.
VI.Future Directions for Art History Pedagogy Yavelberg
The Yavelberg dissertation concludes with a discussion of implications and future research. It synthesizes the findings from the Delphi study. The research provides a comprehensive summary of themes. These themes span skills, content, strategies, and assessments. The study offers recommendations for art history educators. It suggests pathways for curriculum reform and pedagogical innovation. Methodological reflections address the study's strengths and limitations. These insights contribute to the broader field of educational research. The dissertation highlights the ongoing evolution of art history education. It calls for continuous adaptation to student needs and technological advancements. The Course Organization Palette provides a visual summary. This tool aids in designing more effective courses. The recommendations guide future scholarly inquiry. They encourage further investigation into emerging pedagogical trends. This concluding section reinforces the dissertation's impact. It sets a clear agenda for advancing art history pedagogy. The Yavelberg dissertation serves as a significant contribution to the field.
6.1. Recommendations for Enhancing Art History Curriculum
The dissertation culminates in concrete recommendations. These target enhancing the art history curriculum. The findings advocate for a balance of traditional and innovative approaches. Educators should prioritize skill development alongside content knowledge. The study recommends integrating authentic assessments more widely. It suggests leveraging technology for multi-modal engagement. The Yavelberg dissertation pushes for diverse course materials. This includes primary sources and Open Educational Resources. Recommendations extend to fostering 21st Century Skills. These skills are crucial for student success beyond the classroom. The research also encourages a critical examination of pedagogical assumptions. It calls for ongoing professional development for instructors. The recommendations aim to create a more dynamic learning environment. They provide actionable steps for art history departments. These suggestions are grounded in expert consensus. They offer a blueprint for meaningful curricular reform.
6.2. Methodological Reflection and Future Research Pathways
The dissertation includes a methodological reflection. This section discusses the strengths of the Delphi study. It also addresses any research limitations. These insights provide transparency and context. They inform the interpretation of the findings. The study outlines clear pathways for future research. It suggests exploring the long-term impact of proposed strategies. Further investigation into specific technologies is also recommended. Research could delve deeper into the effectiveness of hybrid or online models. The Yavelberg dissertation encourages comparative studies. These could examine different institutional contexts. The findings spark new questions for scholars. They provide a foundation for continued inquiry into art history pedagogy. This reflection ensures the study contributes to ongoing academic discourse. It identifies new frontiers for educational innovation. The dissertation serves as a catalyst for future scholarly endeavors.
Tải xuống file đầy đủ để xem toàn bộ nội dung
Tải đầy đủ (320 trang)Trích đoạn nội dung luận án
Tải xuống để đọc toàn bộDISCOVERING THE PEDAGOGICAL PARADIGM INHERENT IN INTRODUCTORY ART HISTORY SURVEY COURSES, A DELPHI STUDY by Josh Yavelberg A Dissertation Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of George Mason University in Partial Fulfillment of The Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Education Committee: ___________________________________________ Chair ___________________________________________ ___________________________________________ ___________________________________________ Program Director ___________________________________________ Dean, College of Education and Human Development Date: _______ ______________ Fall Semester 2016 George Mason University Fairfax, VA Discovering the Pedagogical Paradigm Inherent in Introductory Art History Survey Courses, a Delphi Study A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy at George Mason University By Josh Yavelberg Master of Science Pratt Institute, 2002 Bachelor of Fine Arts Pratt Institute, 2002 Director: Kelly Schrum, Associate Professor College of Education and Human Development Fall Semester 2016 George Mason University Fairfax, VA Copyright 2016 Joshua A. Yavelberg All Rights Reserved ii Dedication This dissertation is dedicated to my lovely wife Dr. Ashley Babcock and my parents, Arthur and Cheryl, who pushed and supported me throughout this process to get this milestone accomplished. iii Acknowledgements I would like to thank Dr.
Schrum for her dedication as a dissertation advisor, providing me the support and push to complete this process. I would also like to further acknowledge my wife, Dr. Ashley Babcock, for her efforts as an editor for this dissertation. iv Table of Contents Page List of Tables.
xi List of Figures. xii List of Acronyms. xiv Chapter One: Introduction. 1 Statement of the Problem.
7 Overview of the Research Design. 14 Researcher’s Connection to the Problem. 15 Chapter 2: Review of the Literature. 17 History of the Art History Survey Course.
17 The Status Quo. 30 Comprehension, Application, Analysis, Integration, and Learning How to Learn. 31 Synthesis, Evaluation, Integration, and the Human Dimension. 33 Caring and the Human Dimension.
38 21st Century Skills and Technological Literacies. 40 Pedagogical Options / Teaching Strategies. 41 Western versus Global. 42 Chronological versus Thematic Approaches.
46 v Textbooks versus Open Educational Resources. 47 Standardized Assessments, Writing Intensive Approaches, and/or Authentic Assessments. 49 Individual versus Team-Based Learning (TBL). 53 On-Ground versus Hybrid versus Online Delivery.
55 Use of Technology. 57 Gaps in Research. 58 Summary and Conclusion. 60 General Design of the Study.
60 Method of Inquiry. 85 Final data analysis procedure. 85 Limitations / Delimitations of the Research. 86 Chapter 4: Outcome results.
88 Introduction to the Study Results. 99 Skill Outliers and Individual Cases. 115 Content Outliers and Individual Cases. 118 Chapter 5: Strategy Results.
121 Answering Research Question 2. 123 Course blog / hybrid model. 124 Museum / gallery field trips. 126 Less-is-more approach.
128 Participatory / student driven. 130 “Unknown artwork” discussions. 131 Multi-modal engagement. 133 Ineffective teaching strategies.
140 Teaching Strategy Outliers and Individual Cases. 146 Course Assignments/Assessments. 148 Writing journal / blog. 148 Research project of an “unknown.
150 Analysis of a personally viewable artistic artifact. 154 Creative re-interpretation. 156 vii Comparison essay. 157 Critical analysis essay.
158 Art history games / role playing. 161 Group research project. 162 Multiple choice, slide ID, short answer exam. 163 Round 1 general themes.
170 Assignment/Assessment Outliers and Individual Cases. 178 Traditional survey textbook. 178 Traditional survey textbook with supplemental readings. 180 Critical understanding of various historical viewpoints.
181 Primary source materials. 181 Resources on how to write, research, etc. 181 Cultural identity / encountering others’ work. 182 Open educational resources.
187 Course Reading Outliers and Individual Cases. 199 Discussion on Methodology. 206 Chapter 6: Discussion and Conclusion. 232 Future Research and Recommendations.
237 Methodological Reflection and Research Limitations. 250 Letter to Participants and Informed Consent. 280 ix Summary of Themes. 290 Course Organization Palette.
305 x List of Tables Table Page Table 1. Demographic Frequencies by Participant Groups Per Round. Average Perceived Percentage of Student Populations. Round 1 Proposed Skill Themes with Weighted Values.
Round 2 Skill Ranked Results. Round 3 Skills Ranked Results. Round 1 Content Themes with Weighted Values. Round 2 Content Ranked Results.
Round 3 Content Ranked Results. Round 2 Teaching Strategies Ranked Results. Round 3 Teaching Strategies Ranked Results. Round 2 Assignments/Assessments Ranked Results.
Round 3 Assignments/Assessments Ranked Results. Frequency Table of Round 2 Reading Theme Responses. Frequency table for Round 3 Textbook Theme Responses. 188 xi List of Figures Figure Page Figure 1.
Participant experience by participant group. Sections taught or supervised per term. Art historical areas of expertise. Institutional type described by participants.
Placement of the course within the institution. Participant descriptions of the course division. Course delivery modes at the participants’ institution. Course prerequisites as described by participants.
Focus of the course as described by participants. Linear versus thematic approach of the course delivered at participant institutions. Participant response to the requirement of a textbook for their course. Required textbooks described by the participants.
Average class size as provided by participants. Boxplot Demonstrating Round 2 Skill Rankings. Boxplot demonstrating Round 3 skill results. Boxplot of Round 2 content rankings.
Boxplot of Round 3 content rankings. Boxplot of Round 2 Teaching Strategies Rankings. Boxplot of Round 3 Teaching Strategies Rankings. Boxplot of Round 2 Assignment/Assessment Rankings.
Boxplot describing Round 3 assessment/assignment results. Boxplot of Round 2 Textbook Theme Responses. Boxplot Displaying Round 3 Textbook Results. 189 xii List of Acronyms Art History Teaching Resources…………………………………………………AHTR College Art Association……………………………………………………………CAA Computers and the History of Art……………………………………………….CHArt Open Educational Resources…………………………………………………….OERs Partnership for 21st Century Skills……………………………………………….…P21 Study of Teaching and Learning………………………………………………….SoTL Science, Technology, Education, and Math…………………………………….STEM Team-Based Learning………………………………………………………………TBL xiii Abstract DISCOVERING THE PEDAGOGICAL PARADIGM INHERENT IN ART HISTORY SURVEY COURSES, A DELPHI STUDY Josh Yavelberg, Ph.
George Mason University, 2016 Dissertation Director: Dr. Kelly Schrum This dissertation utilized a Delphi methodology in discovery of the perceived outcomes and teaching strategies that are common for art history survey courses taught at higher education institutions throughout the United States. A group of art history faculty, chairs, and current researchers focused on studying teaching and learning within art history weighed in on their perspectives through three mixed method survey rounds, ranking the importance of various themes developed through the responses. The results discover that there is still a strong preference for a Socratic seminar teaching strategy, while the participants also highlighted other outcomes and strategies that are important areas for future research in the discipline.
Keywords: Study of Teaching and Learning (SoTL), Art History Survey, Delphi Methodology Chapter One: Introduction Statement of the Problem The art history survey course has been, and continues to be, a staple of many undergraduate post-secondary education programs. The course is typically required by arts and art history programs as an introduction and is often included as a distribution requirement for other undergraduate programs. In this capacity, the art history survey course has been influential in delivering aesthetic knowledge of a canon of historical artistic objects and a basis for visual literacy for students of every major at many higher education institutions throughout the United States. Art history surveys are also often the sole course within a student’s curriculum to provide any familiarity with visual art and architecture within culture.
A once pedagogically innovative course, the survey has, with few exceptions, stagnated. Titles such as “Art-in-the-Dark” or “Midnight-at-Noon” are often tagged onto the nearly standardized dual slide lecture. At many institutions, faculty still teach this course to auditoriums of 100 or more students as part of their obligation to their departments, while their attention is directed more to their tenure research than to the art of teaching (D’Alleva, 2015; Donahue-Wallace, La Follette, & Pappas, 2008). The course relies heavily on a few expensive textbooks, hardly read by the students (Baier, Hendricks, Warren Gorden, Hendricks, & Cochran, 2011), that provide chronological 1 structure to a generally accepted western canon of art.
Students no longer find importance in memorizing the names, dates, styles, terminology, and other such facts that are often required to pass the midterm and final exams when the Internet is at their fingertips to answer such questions in an age that represents what Mansfield Spitzer (2012) has coined Digital Dementia. A clear marker for the ways in which the art history survey has stagnated is the publication of a text, A Survival Guide for Art History Students, written by Cristina Maranci (2005) and published by Pearson / Prentice Hall. This text has provided an attempt to explain the importance of visual literacy and, using a humorous tone, debunked various myths about the course, but continued to describe “the anatomy of an art history class” (p. The anatomy of a survey course is considered so standard and mystifying that there is an apparent market for the complete publication of a guide for students on how to make sense of this now foreign world.
Tests are standardized in a manner that their structure and the specific study skills necessary are broken down for the student to get past this course and move on. The book even presumed to explain the exact manner on how to take bulleted notes from an art history lecture. The existence of Maranci (2005)’s text speaks volumes to the problems this course currently has for a student population that may have never visited an art museum. Kathleen Desmond explained: Visiting an art museum is a first in the lives of many of our first-generation college students.
Some students ask what they should wear and if they are allowed to talk in the museum, indicating why they have not visited an art museum before. 2 We take a lot for granted as art professors, and we need to try to remember what it was like before we devoted our lives to the study of art. Many professors teach the way they learned, with no consideration of the fact that students learn differently these days than they did. Some professors are also dedicated to the “canon” and cannot figure out how to get that canon taught if not by lecture-the way they learned.
(Phelan, Concannon, Irina, Desmond, & et al, 2005, p. 35) Maranci (2005) mirrored these claims of “profound disorientation” that these first-time students face what she believes are the standard components of the introductory art history class as taught in colleges and universities in the United States” (p. This assumed standardization mirrored by statements of concerned professors at the prominent College Art Association (CAA) conference (College Art Association [CAA] Education Committee, 2015) amplifies the problems of stagnation and lack of connection with students. In the recent Survey of Public Participation in the Arts conducted by the National Endowment for the Arts (2013), there is a demonstrated downward trend in art museum or gallery attendance, especially among adults aged 18-44 years old.
Especially telling is the importance of education in museum attendance. In 2012, as the National Endowment for the Arts stated, 9.9% of high school graduates noted having visited an art museum or gallery, whereas 19.7% who have attended some college and 37.2% of college graduates have visited art museums or galleries at least once within the year surveyed. This statistic has demonstrated the importance of the art history survey course to engage students, but 3 it should also be noted that these numbers are in steady decline of several percentage points each year the survey was given. In 2008, the number of college graduates attending museums was over 40.6% of those surveyed and this downward trend has been consistent since 1992, perhaps also adding to the significant shift in philanthropic giving by Gen Xers and beyond, forcing museums to rethink their fundraising strategies (Merritt & Katz, 2013).
Current political trends have also added additional pressures on the art history survey course.
Nội dung được bảo vệ bản quyền — Tải xuống đầy đủ
Trích dẫn luận án này
Josh Yavelberg (2016). Yavelberg dissertation final [Luận án tiến sĩ, George Mason University]. LuanAn.net. https://luanan.net/giao-duc-hoc/yavelberg-dissertation-final
Câu hỏi thường gặp
Luận án "Yavelberg dissertation final" nghiên cứu về vấn đề gì?
Hoàn thành luận văn Yavelberg. Tóm tắt nghiên cứu, phân tích kết quả và đề xuất hướng phát triển tương lai.
Luận án "Yavelberg dissertation final" được bảo vệ tại trường nào?
Luận án này được bảo vệ tại George Mason University. Năm bảo vệ: 2016.
Luận án "Yavelberg dissertation final" thuộc chuyên ngành gì?
Luận án "Yavelberg dissertation final" thuộc chuyên ngành Education. Danh mục: Giáo Dục Học.
Luận án "Yavelberg dissertation final" có bao nhiêu trang?
Luận án "Yavelberg dissertation final" có 320 trang. Bạn có thể xem trước một phần tài liệu ngay trên trang web trước khi tải về.
Cách tải luận án "Yavelberg dissertation final" về máy như thế nào?
Để tải luận án về máy, bạn nhấn nút "Tải xuống ngay" trên trang này, sau đó hoàn tất thanh toán phí lưu trữ. File sẽ được tải xuống ngay sau khi thanh toán thành công. Hỗ trợ qua Zalo: 0559 297 239.