I have previously presented on the history of art at Bowdoin from 1794 to the present, which serves as the scaffolding for my honors project. Art at Bowdoin in the context of my research project is defined by a culmination of things: objects and architecture that inhabit campus as they contribute to the environment; course content in art history regarding subject area and in visual arts regarding techniques; art collections owned by Bowdoin; art-related student events; and photographs that advertise Bowdoin’s campus. Understanding how art has been taught and experienced at Bowdoin historically is crucial to my argument. I argue that at Bowdoin College, failure to provide Culturally Relevant Teaching (CRT) in art studio courses dismisses the representation of Blackness in the Visual Arts Department. This argument is framed by two theoretical frameworks: Culturally Relevant Teaching (CRT) and Critical Race Art History (CRAH).

 

Culturally Relevant Teaching (CRT)

CRT, coined by Gloria Ladson-Billings, has developed the concept to help teachers become more effective in the classroom by being more attentive to their students’ cultural backgrounds.

Billings proposed that teachers ground their pedagogy around three criteria:

“An ability to develop students academically, a willingness to nurture and support cultural competence, and development of sociopolitical or critical consciousness.”[1]

This pedagogical practice requires teachers to engage with each criterion, further promoting the personal and academic success of all students. It has been adopted by school districts and even organizations such as Teach for America which describes the benefits of CRT as:

“students engaging in academically rigorous curriculum and learning, feel affirmed in their identities and experiences, and develop the knowledge and skills to engage the world and others critically.”[2]

Other scholars such as Joni B. Acuff[3] and Amelia M. Kraehe[4], who address Race in Art Education in their research, have explained the need for CRT in the field of Art Education, but there is a gap in the examination of race in reference to fine arts training.

How are students being trained as artists? 

Where are the methods of teaching being derived from?

 

Critical Race Art History (CRAH)

CRAH, coined by Camara Dia Holloway, is described to:

“Draw on the insights of social, feminist, and queer histories of art. CRAH aims to understand how race affects how we view the creation, content and reception of visual objects”[5]

CRAH is a discourse that draws on Critical Race Theory, Post-Colonial Theory, and African Diasporic Studies.  It critiques the discipline of Art History and a great deal of scholarship that fails to recognize or consider race.

Ladson-Billings and Holloway make important claims regarding the implications of race in educating students and how we perceive visual objects, but these scholars do not go into depth about the technical training of artists, or how this pedagogical practice could fit into studio art courses. My research draws directly from the frameworks of Ladson-Billings and Holloway in order to argue for the need for CRT in the studio art classroom. Artists should have the training and technical facility to represent all people, and altering the curriculum appears to be a productive starter. My position as a Black and Indigenous artist enables me to reflect on the intersection of CRAH and CRT and to build upon them in order to highlight the need for pedagogical practice in studio art courses, that doesn’t center technical training derived from the Western canon of art production in Bowdoin’s Visual Arts Department.

The next section will highlight how I used the gap in my artistic training to engage in a self-taught practice. Please click the link below to read the nest section, A Self-Taught Pedagogical Studio Practice.

 

[1]  Ladson-Billings, Gloria. “Toward a Theory of Culturally Relevant Pedagogy.” American Educational Research Journal32, no. 3 (1995): 465–91. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312032003465.

[2] “How to Practice Culturally Relevant Pedagogy.” Teach For America. Accessed July 10, 2019. https://www.teachforamerica.org/stories/how-to-engage-culturally-relevant-pedagogy.

[3] Joni Boyd Acuff, “(Re)Constructing Cultural Conceptions and Practices in Art Education: An Action Research Study,” Visual Arts Research 40, no. 2 (2014): 67–78, https://doi.org/10.5406/visuartsrese.40.2.0067.

[4] KRAEHE and ACUFF, “Theoretical Considerations for Art Education Research With and About ‘Underserved Populations.’”

[5] Holloway, Camara D. “Race-Ing Art History,” 2013. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203614440.