I think a lot of the issues people have with VTS would diminish if they
knew more about how the process worked. What I found interesting about this
reading and as Yenawine points out, what educators seek to do is to teach
students the correct way to do things; and that’s why VTS is hard for some
people to accept because VTS is not about proving students right or wrong.
As for how I would defend VTS to an administrator, I would simply say
that VTS requires participants to think critically as well as teach students
how to view art. Without any VTS experience, students would not learn how to
view an image and contemplate its meaning. If I were to just tell students the
answers to their questions they wouldn’t continue to investigate the image
further. I would also say that the whole point of VTS is to give students the
freedom to imagine what they want and therefore there is no right or wrong
answer. Reassuring students that there is no right or wrong answers also makes
them feel comfortable in sharing their thoughts. If students are told that
their assumptions are wrong, it will hurt their confidence and they refrain
from speaking up again. If I were to tell students the answers to their
questions, they would not develop into critical thinkers that experience with
VTS allows. But as I said before, administrators and fellow educators also need
to be educated about how VTS works. If they understand the process, their confusion
as to why VTS facilitators don’t provide answers will be made clear.
Many possible right answers are certainly difficult for teachers to understand. I agree also that whether we acknowledge it or not, one of our goals is to help students "get it right," no matter what we are teaching. The thing that is simultaneously unsettling and encouraging is that getting it "right" in VTS is learning that there is no such target in art viewing! I think the fact that Yenawine is a career educator who has "been there and done that" reinforces his credibility.
ReplyDelete