Constructing knowledge in art: part II: a typical constructive thinking assignment.

The assignment illustrated here is an example of constructive thinking. Students are guided through the process of creating a self-portrait by comparing the differences between a prehistoric hominid skull and the skull of a modern human. Students were encouraged to find the differences between the respective skulls, including eye placement, shape, and cranial size differences. A hypothesis was made regarding the reasons for the differences, such as the possibility that the hominid was at least partially quadripedial. This could account for the placement of the eyes higher on the forehead. Students speculated that the ability to walk on two feet allowed the evolution of the skull by forcing the eye sockets to develop lower, creating the opportunity for the cranium to change shape and enlarge as generations evolved.

A discussion ensued about the proportions of the human face and the similarities that make human beings look distinct from other mammals. Individual characteristics exist within the boundaries of the average human proportion.

The class was then asked to create a self-portrait with specific criteria for assessment. The first objective was to attain proper human proportion and attempt to create a likeness of themselves. The second part of the assignment asked the students to place their image in a background that would create a self-portrait within their self-portrait. The background was to illustrate an element of their own personalities, their fears, hopes, fantasies, or a favorite place.

The result was a series of work that not only documented the physical likeness of the student, but also reinforced their discovery of proportion, while allowing them to open a window in their personality for the viewers to enjoy and speculate on. The backgrounds ranged from whimsical representations of flying saucers, marching armies of faceless people, or dollar bills, to more serious introspection, like drawing the face on a punching bag or picturing a long hallway with a locked door. The assignment was assessed on both the conformity of the proper proportion and the creativity of the background. The conformity in the proportion was a direct result of the exploration of the evolutionary traits in the two skulls. Students created their own knowledge base and as a result knew to look for familiar mistakes in portraiture such as feature placement and underlying basic structure. The introduction of the background elements allowed the students to use their work as visual language and a basis for provoking school-wide discussion when the work was displayed.

NATIONAL STANDARD

Students use subjects, themes, and symbols that demonstrate knowledge of contexts, values, and aesthetics that communicate intended meaning in artworks.

Part one of this series appeared in the September issue. The final part of this series, "Putting Constructive Thinking At Risk," will apper in the November issue.

David A. Petit is an art teacher at Eagle Hill Middle School in Manlius, New York.