High ability visual artists a national mixed methods study of se

University of Missouri, St. Louis IRL @ UMSL Dissertations UMSL Graduate Works 5-4-2016 High Ability Visual Artists: A National Mixed Methods Study of Secondary Art Teacher Training and Practice Jennifer Christine Fisher University of Missouri-St. Louis Follow this and additional works at: https://irl.edu/dissertation Part of the Education Commons Recommended Citation Fisher, Jennifer Christine, "High Ability Visual Artists: A National Mixed Methods Study of Secondary Art Teacher Training and Practice" (2016).edu/dissertation/122 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the UMSL Graduate Works at IRL @ UMSL. It has been accepted for inclusion in Dissertations by an authorized administrator of IRL @ UMSL.

For more information, please contact marvinh@umsl. Running head: HIGH ABILITY VISUAL ARTISTS: A NATIONAL MIXED HIGH ABILITY VISUAL ARTISTS: A NATIONAL MIXED METHODS STUDY OF SECONDARY ART TEACHER TRAINING AND PRACTICE by JENNIFER C., Special Education-Gifted, University of Missouri-Columbia, 2011 B., Art Education, Southeast Missouri State University, 2009 A Dissertation Submitted to The Graduate School at the University of Missouri-St. Louis in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree Doctor of Philosophy in Education with an emphasis in Teaching and Learning May, 2016 Advisory Committee E. Louis Lankford, Ph.

Chairperson Karen Cummings, Ph. Patricia Kopetz, Ed. Theodore Tarkow, Ph. Fisher, 2016 HIGH ABILITY VISUAL ARTISTS: A NATIONAL MIXED METHODS STUDY ii" Abstract This study sought to determine the confidence levels and preparation of secondary art teachers in working with students who demonstrate high ability in the visual arts.

This information is vital in order to inform the art education community regarding whether or not it does, why it should, and how it can best meet the needs of all students it serves. The study utilized a mixed methods approach. Quantitative data was collected to form a descriptive statistical base. This was necessary due to a paucity of research in the demographic particulars of secondary art teachers’ measured confidence and preparedness in working with students who have high abilities in the visual arts.

Qualitative data, in the form of interviews and field notes was collected in order to add depth and breadth to the research regarding these teachers. The study found that the vast majority of surveyed secondary art educators felt generally confident in their ability to work with high ability visual artists, despite a marked deficit in preservice training and professional development. HIGH ABILITY VISUAL ARTISTS: A NATIONAL MIXED METHODS STUDY iii" Acknowledgements I would like to thank a number of individuals to whom I am forever indebted for their contributions to the development of this research. Without the endless encouragement, guidance, and friendship of Dr.

Louis Lankford, this dissertation would never have happened. Thank you for always encouraging me to live my life and not just go through the motions. Karen Cummings and Dr. Patricia Kopetz, thank you for pushing me toward excellence even when I did not want to be pushed.

Your dedication will not soon be forgotten. Ted Tarkow, thank you for your candor, humor, and faith in me. Many of the best parts of my life have been directly set into motion because of you. To my family at Missouri Scholars Academy, thank you for helping me become a better human being.

To my family at Potosi R-3, thank you for being my figurative and literal cheerleaders. Your support has meant everything to me. To Keeli and Jeff Singer, thank you for mentoring and caring about me for the past 20 years. To Brenda Fatchett, John McDowell, and Greg Kester, thank you for being the inspiration for my career and my education; you all accepted and inspired me beyond the call of duty.

To Sam, Boots, Bernie, and Beth, thank you for your love, patience, and friendship. To Uncle Doc, I kept my promise. To Mom, thank you for being my solid rock for every part of my entire life. To Dad, thank you for always understanding me, even when no one else does.

To Mallory, thank you for your unwavering belief in me, even when I did not believe in myself. To Devin, thank you for supporting me no matter what crazy things I want to do. You remain my best decision, best friend, and the best part of my life. HIGH ABILITY VISUAL ARTISTS: A NATIONAL MIXED METHODS STUDY iv" Table of Contents Abstract.

iii List of Tables. vii List of Figures. viii Chapter 1: Introduction .1 Statement of the Problem.1 Defining High Ability Visual Artists (HAVA).7 Significance of Study .8 Chapter 2: Review of the Literature.9 Part One: Understanding HAVAs .9 Rationale for the Education of HAVAs .10 Visual Arts as a Necessary and Equal Academic Discipline.11 Recognizing HAVA Students.12 Characteristics of HAVA Students and their Artwork.13 Myths Surrounding HAVA Education .14 Screening Practices for HAVA Students .16 Admission Criteria to HAVA Programs.18 History of High Ability Visual Artists .19 Part Two: Current Research and Policy .19 The Getty Center for Education in the Arts .22 Foundations of HAVA Policy .25 Part Three: Challenges and Criticisms.26 Funding Constraints to HAVA Programs.26 Limited Preservice Teacher Education .27 Criticisms of High Ability Visual Arts Programs.28 Elitism and Gifted Education .29 Underrepresentation and Equity in HAVA Programs.32 Part Four: Programming for Academic and Affective Development.34 Evaluating HAVA Programs .34 High Ability Underachievers .36 HIGH ABILITY VISUAL ARTISTS: A NATIONAL MIXED METHODS STUDY v" Bibliotherapy and Videotherapy for Affective Development .36 Self-Perceptions of HAVA Students.38 Parenting HAVA Students.39 Teachers and HAVA Students.39 Curriculum and Instruction of HAVAs.41 Mixed Ability Grouping .43 Ability Grouping for HAVA Students .56 Phase One: Web Based Survey.56 Participants and Sampling Procedures .59 Experiences Working With HAVA Students .60 Level of Confidence .60 Open-Ended Items .61 Survey Development and Pilot .61 Validity and Reliability .61 Survey Data Collection Procedures .62 Survey Data Analysis.62 Quantitative Survey Data Analysis .63 Qualitative Survey Data Analysis.63 Phase Two: Qualitative Data Collection.64 Validity and Reliability .64 Qualitative Data Collection Procedures .65 Qualitative Data Analysis.66 Personal Involvement and Role of the Researcher.68 Chapter 4: Phase One Results .69 Review of Phase One Results .69 Reporting of Phase One Data Collection .71 Section One: Demographic Description of Survey Participants .71 Section Two: Survey Participants’ Perceptions of HAVAs .88 Section Three: Preparation in Working With HAVAs .92 Section Four: Experiences in Working with HAVAs.96 Section Five: Likert Scaled Items.100 Section Six: Qualitative Survey Responses.102 Chapter 5: Phase Two Results.110 Review of Phase Two Data Collection .110 Reporting of Phase Two Data Collection.112 HIGH ABILITY VISUAL ARTISTS: A NATIONAL MIXED METHODS STUDY vi" Victoria .129 Chapter 6: Summary, Conclusions, and Recommendations .134 Summary of the Study.136 Recommendations for Future Action.159 Appendix A: Informed Consent Form for Survey Participants.159 Appendix B: HAVA Identifiers .163 Appendix C: HAVA Behaviors.166 Appendix D: Preservice Training.168 Appendix E: Inservice Professional Development.170 Appendix F: Other Challenges .172 Appendix G: Other Benefits .175 Appendix H: How to Meet Academic and Affective Needs .177 Appendix I: How to Better Prepare Future Art Educators.217 Appendix J: One Piece of Advice for Future Art Educators.232 Appendix K: Other Thoughts to Contribute.241 Appendix L: Interview Transcripts With Victoria.249 Appendix M: Interview Transcripts With Dean.256 Appendix N: Interview Transcripts With Amber .264 Appendix O: Interview Transcript With Kristi.274 Appendix P: Interview Transcripts With Jessica .282 Appendix Q: Interview Transcript With Kelly.292 Appendix R: Survey Questionnaire .298 Appendix S: Interview Questions.304 HIGH ABILITY VISUAL ARTISTS: A NATIONAL MIXED METHODS STUDY vii" List of Tables Table 1 Number of Survey Participants by State .72 Table 2 Likert Scaled Items .100 Table 3 Meeting the Academic and Affective Needs of HAVAs.103 Table 4 Preparing Future Art Educators to Work With HAVAs.105 Table 5 Advice for New Teachers Working With HAVAs .106 Table 6 Additional Thoughts About HAVAs .109 HIGH ABILITY VISUAL ARTISTS: A NATIONAL MIXED METHODS STUDY viii" List of Figures Figure 1 Characteristics of HAVAs and Cited Resources .13 Figure 2 Admission Criteria into HAVA Programs and Cited Resources.18 Figure 3 Characteristics of Educators and Cited Resources .41 Figure 4 Clark and Zimmerman’s Basic Administrative Arrangements for Gifted Child Programming.42 Figure 5 Notification Methods.71 Figure 6 Instructional Level Participating Educators Taught At.75 Figure 7 Setting or Location of Participants’ School(s). 76 Figure 8 Number of HAVAs Taught per Week .77 Figure 9 Number of Students Taught per Week.78 Figure 10 Participants Who Teach at a Public or Private School.79 Figure 11 Participants Teaching at Schools With Strong Fine Arts Emphasis .80 Figure 12 Number of Years Teaching.81 Figure 13 Number of Years Teaching Art.82 Figure 14 Number of Years Teaching Secondary Art.83 Figure 15 Grades Taught .84 Figure 16 Gender of Participants.85 Figure 17 Participants’ Highest Degree Earned .86 Figure 18 Art Certification of Participants .87 Figure 19 Identifiers of HAVAs.89 Figure 20 Behaviors Describing HAVAs .91 Figure 21 Preservice Training and Experience Regarding HAVAs .93 Figure 22 Inservice Professional Development Regarding HAVAs.95 Figure 23 Challenges in Working with HAVAs.97 Figure 24 Benefits to Working with HAVAs.99 Figure 25 Single Responses to Additional Sharing About HAVAs.108 Figure 26 Demographic Data.111 " " HIGH ABILITY VISUAL ARTISTS: A NATIONAL MIXED METHODS STUDY 1! Chapter 1: Introduction Statement of the Problem There is a paucity of research regarding the confidence and preparedness of secondary art educators working with students who have high ability in the visual arts (HAVA).

It is imperative to determine how confident and prepared they are to work with the population of young high ability visual artists in order to ensure that art educators are able to meet the academic and affective needs of all students with whom they work. Meeting the varied needs of all students in a secondary educational environment, including those who have high abilities in the visual arts, is a challenging task. Ensuring that teachers have adequate training in order to meet the needs of all learners is an important step in that process. In 1994, Clark and Zimmerman suggested that the availability of resources that aid secondary art educators in meeting the needs of high ability students is both limited and dated.

Over two decades later, little has been published to rectify this deficit. Additionally, the National Association for Gifted Children (NAGC) estimates that approximately six to ten percent of the United States’ student population has been identified as gifted and talented in one or multiple areas (National Association for Gifted Children, 2014). This statistic is troubling in light of the observance that professional development in working with gifted and talented students is rarely provided to regular education teachers (Gallagher, 2001). Secondary art educators are a subset of regular education teachers; therefore, the deficit in resources and training of secondary art teachers in working with high ability visual artists (HAVA) may prevent these students from receiving the education that best meets their needs.

HIGH ABILITY VISUAL ARTISTS: A NATIONAL MIXED METHODS STUDY 2! Defining High Ability Visual Artists (HAVA) Gifted and talented education is a field that consistently struggles to outline a comprehensive definition of giftedness and talent. In fact, Clark and Zimmerman (1994) point this out as a semantic problem in determining program options for this population of students, as there are no agreed upon definitions. A decade later, these authors (Clark & Zimmerman, 2004) went on to point out that the title of gifted and talented in the arts affected students differently than the title of academically gifted. For example, students surveyed viewed the title of “creative” quite favorably, yet they preferred being labeled “hard working” over the term “intelligent.” It is important to note that this researcher does not condone a separation of “high ability in the visual arts” from “academically gifted and talented” due to the implication that the visual arts are not an “academic” discipline.

Clark and Zimmerman (2004) recommended using the term artistically talented in research relative to these students, but this researcher insists that the inclusion of the term gifted is equally as important in this regard.