presidential address

National Art Education Association

Presidential AddressAuthor(s): Kent AndersonSource: Art Education, Vol. 33, No. 5 (Sep., 1980), pp. 4-10Published by: National Art Education AssociationStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3192463 .

Accessed: 16/06/2014 21:13

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

National Art Education Association is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to ArtEducation.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 62.122.76.54 on Mon, 16 Jun 2014 21:13:08 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=naea

http://www.jstor.org/stable/3192463?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


"Multiple Rationales May Further Substantiate the Worth of Our Profession, But I View the Primary, Over-Arching Reason For Art in the Schools To Be Its Cruciality To Each Individual's Growth and Development As a Human Being."

Kent Anderson

Sometime within the span of the last ten years, the NAEA Board

decided that the president of the As- sociation should be one of the speak- ers at the annual convention of the Association. This address could take the form of an annual "State of the Association" message and could serve as a forum for the presentation of ideas related to the goals of the As- sociation and the needs of the profession. In this message today, I hope to do "all of the above." I should, perhaps, begin by paying homage to the significance of a new decade and offer acknowledgement of the ten years immediately past. The Phi Delta Kappan magazine recently had an article to this topic with the title: "The Morning After the Decade Before."

If not already copyrighted, that title could easily describe our profession as we review the past ten years in art education. We entered the '70's with faith and high hopes. We eye the '80's with trepidation, more than a grain of negativism, cynicism, and skepticism. We've seen our dreams of strong gov- ernmental support for art education take devious directions down what seems to be a dead-end road-with little space for even an intelligent U-turn in the foreseeable future. In our Association journals, we've published countless articles and papers that fervently and cogently describe the values of sound art education programs. As individuals within the As- sociation, we've read numerous statements by individuals and organizations, from areas other than the arts, as they heaped paeans of praise upon the value of the arts in the educational process.

Now-as we edge into the '80's, we note that the delights of our profession

'F



are becoming outnumbered by the di- lemmas, the pleasures of art teaching countervailed by the problems.

This point in time between two dec- ades must serve as an opportune mo- ment to review our strengths, our actions, our weaknesses-and to reas- sess our goals and formulate effective ways to deal with lingering old problems and emerging new ones. We must adapt to the times ahead.

It hasn't been all bad-nor does the future cast only shadows. Ten years ago this month, I was local chair for one of the last Western Regional Con- ventions. The 1970 meeting in Mil- waukee carried the theme: "Decade for Decision." While this was a typi- cal thematic slogan devised to describe any convening of an organization, we have witnessed ten years of decisions, difficult decisions, made by your Association. One year after this 1970 conference, a new constitution for the Association was voted upon, and a more representative national leadership structure for our Associa- tion was adopted. This included development by the Board of the States Assembly concept.

Five years later, in 1975, as a member of the NAEA Board of Di- rectors representing the Western Re- gion, I journeyed to Reston and turned over a shovelful of dirt as a symbol of the decision to proceed with construction of our National Center for Art Education. In retro- spect, this construction of a building has proved to be a decision of great financial advantage in these inflation- ary times. During these same ten years, over 40 of our state associations voted for unification with the National-an act effectively serving the mutual needs of both state and national associations. I might observe that the concepts for both of these major efforts of the Association origi- nated in the first few years of the decade. Perhaps a decade can be viewed as an arbitrary span of time where ideas emerge and are refined, crises are noted and resolved, and actions are conceived and achieved. I hope that ten years from now, in the retire- ment community of my choice, I can relax and note the accomplishment of some major achievements for the As- sociation that are just now in the process of conception and considera- tion.

In summary, the '70's were a period of growth and accomplishment for NAEA: a move from 4,000 to over

9,000 active members, from 0 to 42 unified states, from a small rented space to an aesthetic and functional building of our own. Numerous other events occurred during the '70's- many publications including the Bicentennial Commission Report on the status of art education were published. Alliances were forged with other arts associations-beginning with the DAMT groups and moving towards our present leadership role with the National Assembly of Arts Education Organizations. The initia- tion and continuation of working rela- tionships with the influential, decision-making organizations of our profession-NAESP, NASSP, PTA, AASA, NASB, and ASCD began. I might note that just yesterday I was a platform guest at the opening session of the conference of the Association for Supervision and Curriculum De- velopment. In his conference greet- ings, ASCD President Benjamin P. Ebersole defined their conference theme: "Fundamentals for Fulfill- ment," as the reaching of one's men- tal, physical, and societal potential through mastery of the fundamentals, whether in the academics or the arts-both areas being necessary in the context of a balanced curriculum. He went on to say:

At this time of emphasis on the basic skills, all people who are dedicated to the education profession must give leadership to the comprehensive definition of basics. They must look beyond the goal of mere competence of performance to the self- actualization of individuals.

The academic skills are essential, but incomplete for a quality life unless sup- ported with that skill fundamental to all learning-the ability to create. The arts involve, elements of self-discovery which are vital to the learning process and to personal fulfillment. All the skills, the academic, the creative, and the expressive are more successfully integrated within the individual if they are linked in the teaching-learning process.

These words illustrate the effec- tiveness of NAEA's cooperative efforts with the other educational organizations. The recently published Essentials of Education brochure by a consortium of educational associations, including NAEA, is another example of this new era of cooperation, as is a proposed network of dis- ciplines, with art included, that form the basis of our American education

system. This subject-based advocacy group-to be called the Curriculum Content Consortium-is another example of the efforts of NAEA to represent art teachers in all policy- making arenas.

To move from discussion of a decade to review of a 1/10th portion of that unit of time, let me comment briefly on what your Association has accomplished since our meeting in San Francisco, approximately one year ago today.

One of the most persuasive small publications of NAEA, written some six years ago, and used by many ad- vocates of state unification and as a major rationale for becoming an NAEA member, is the brochure: What's In It For Me?, written by then NAEA president, Harlan Hoffa. If this well-written rationale for membership has a list of Association actions that could convince a prospec- tive member to join NAEA in, say, 1975, the listing of recent additional activities should make it clear to all in art education that NAEA is the place to be-the place where effective actions on behalf of the art teacher take place.

In the political action sphere, the NAEA is able to represent our profession, an advocacy effort almost im- possible for most of us who live many miles from Washington. Through the presence of John Mahlmann and elected leadership, NAEA has tes- tified in support of establishment of the new U.S. Department of Educa- tion, and was represented at the White House ceremony officially establish- ing the Department. We have given testimony to Congress on the Arts Endowment, asking along with our colleagues in MENC (Music Educa- tors National Conference) and CAA (College Art Association) for a Con- gressional study committee on arts education and the federal govern- ment; and we have expressed concern to the Commissioner of Education concerning changes in legislation gov- erning funding for the arts in education.

John Mahlmann, on our behalf, also gave testimony to Congress at special hearings such as the recent one for arts and older Americans.

To better serve membership, NAEA has assisted in development of several valuable projects and activities. The first I will mention is a 1980 summer conference. I am especially pleased to see this needed activ-

Art Education September 1980 5



ity come to fruition, since I presented the concept of a summer regional conference to the NAEA Board some four years ago. The idea has germi- nated under the leadership of our present Board representative from the Western Region, Jaylene Armstrong, who has provided the impetus to make this concept a reality. The conference, "Beyond the Schoolhouse Door," planned by representatives of the Western Region states, is scheduled for Minneapolis, Minnesota, from June 26 to June 29. The reason for this first summer convention is to address major art education issues in a setting we believe will meet the needs of many members who cannot be re- leased to attend our National Conven- tion. Another summer, 1980, conference is planned as a result of a small grant from the National Committee * Arts for the Handicapped, to develop a joint publication with AATA (American Art Therapy Association) as a resource for art teachers working with handicapped children.

Second, a new program called "NAEA OK" provides discounts on art materials for members at over 100 cooperating art stores upon presentation of the NAEA membership card. Cooperating stores will have the "NAEA OK" decal on display. This is the kind of initiative that provides an obvious money-saving service to our members. It is also only the beginning of what we hope is a major expansion of this service.

Numerous other smaller-but no less important-actions have taken place. Let me cite just a few.

At the instigation of the States As- sembly, NAEA established a children's art project for art works by children from the state associations to be furnished for the national offices of education associations. Works were assembled for the Council of Chief State School Officers and National School Boards Association offices.

There has been continued growth and development of the National Art Honor Society for high school students.

We cooperated with, and support, ETS (Educational Testing Service) in developing a national Art Awards Program. John Mahlmann served on the Steering Committee for this project.

A meeting was held with the head of the Scholastic Art Awards program to discuss a series of proposed activities that will serve our Secondary Division members and be of mutual benefit to

our two organizations. We worked cooperatively with

NAMTA (National Art Materials Trade Association) to produce a slide-tape set on drawing that will be available in the near future.

We initiated, in cooperation with the MENC (Music Educators Na- tional Conference) a pilot program to recognize and present awards to school administrators from school districts that have exemplary art and/or music programs. This is now being field-tested in Wisconsin and is viewed as a means to promote, and to a degree enforce, the NAEA stand- ards for quality art programs.

The actions cited are representative of the many small but important efforts and programs accomplished by your Association over the past calen- dar year. Let me move now to discussion of the major issues with which our profession is concerned at this time. These are the bigger issues that, members tell me, need actions by NAEA. Dealing with these issues, and others as they emerge, seems to con- stitute the present raison d'etre of our Association's existence, since they affect so directly the quality and quantity of art instruction in our schools.

The first issue is the continuing hue and cry for a return to the "basics" of education-whatever that means! The Council for Basic Education defines the basics as "making sure that all students receive adequate instruction in English (reading and writing), math, sciences, history, foreign lan- guages and the arts." The back to basics argument, a code term for cutting the budget, seems less a cogent theory than a mood that seems to sweep the country from time to time-and a lik- ing for alliteration.

This seems to be an issue more rooted in economics than in education, but the chances of the movement's going quietly away if given sufficient benign neglect are rather remote. Art can continue without paying attention to this socio- economic concern. Art education, however, does not enjoy that lux- ury. We cannot accept aesthetic and expressive illiteracy as a by-product of fiscal conservation. NAEA must mount a continuing series of activities to confront this force. NAEA must take the offensive rather than merely responding to these never-ending crises of education and society. I note that in recent years, schools have had more reading specialists than ever be-

fore, more reading "hardware," more reading "software," more testing and accountability strategies, but still the reading scores decline. To begin ad- dressing this phenomenon, a conference and subsequent publication, Art, Reading, and the Creation of Mean- ing, were facilitated by NAEA. In the past year, we have provided the fol- lowing additional efforts and actions in behalf of art teachers in school districts facing this problem.

The book, Arts Education and Back to Basics, was published last summer. This book is a major statement on the place of art education in the context of a "basics" emphasis. Any art teacher or art administrator seeking rationales for art education will find a wide variety of viable arguments in this publication. In another action, NAEA cooperated with other subject-based educational associations, especially the National Council for Teachers of English, in producing the "Essen- tials" statement-a message to parents and educational administrators that broadens the concept of defining the "basics" in education.

The recent adoption by the PTA of a resolution supporting the arts had its genesis in a meeting of the NAEA Board and the PTA leadership in Chicago. These, and other NAEA initiated efforts, will not solve all of our problems in this area. The truth is that we must-and shall-continue in a variety of ways to remind this nation that the purpose of education is sub- stantially broader than the teaching of reading and math, that a child is more than sets of numbers describing an al- leged I.Q., a reading score, a math percentile. If we must continue to play the "basics" game, we must say, again and again, in every form of communication available to us, that art is basic to the educated life and mind; basic to motivated learning; basic as a means to express ideas and feelings, basic to human development; basic to respect for self; basic to emergence from schooling as an educated, creative, civilized, realized, intelligent human being, and each of those adjectives is separate and crucial for the development of a whole person.

A related major issue affecting art teachers today is the growing trend toward vocationalism in our public schools and universities. Parents want their children to attain a job skill- and they believe that art is not one of the essential ingredients in career preparation. This is, in fact, true. You




can get a good job without art- without a background in drawing, forming, fusing-knowing about Da Vinci, Laurencin, Gilliam. Adminis- trators, curriculum developers, educational bureaucrats know this. Par- ents know this, too. When a young person even suggests to his or her parents that he or she wishes to become an artist, the answer is: "How will you live?" The majority of parents view art as an economic disaster area, the artist as unable to function in society. There are some things, however, that they may not know. They may not know that art contributes directly to many aspects of the world of work ranging from the balanced satisfaction of the individual worker to the fact that there are hundreds of occupations-and hundreds of thousands of actual jobs-that you can't get, or do well in, without meaningful art education.

What has NAEA done in response to this need? In the past year, we have conducted four art careers conferences, one in each region of the Asso- ciation. At these conferences, major papers were prepared and presented that examined all aspects of careers in art. Our newsletter carried many pages of information on these meetings, and four follow-up publications were generated and are available to you today. Titles of these publications are: Art Education and the World of Work, a compilation of major papers on art careers, edited by Ron Silver- man, plus three monographs: Career Education and the Art Teaching Pro- fession, which I edited with the assist- ance of four job-alike divisional representatives who conducted the small job-alike group sessions at each of the four conferences and whose efforts should be acknowledged. They are Carol Lokken, Elementary Division; Marilyn Heilman, Secondary Divi- sion; Al Hurwitz, Supervision and Administration Division; and Foster Wygant, Higher Education Division. Other monographs are Career Educa- tion in the Visual Arts: Representative Programs and Projects, edited by George Geahigan, and Careers in the Visual Arts: Options, Training, and Employment, edited by Ted Zernich. With these publications, NAEA members can know more about this important aspect of art education and can disseminate some "attitude ad- justments" to guidance counselors, administrators, parents, and-of more importance-provide students with meaningful information about the

7



preparations and prospects for careers in art.

This year-long program of activities came about because one of our past presidents, Charles Dom, and our executive director, John Mahlmann, spent many hours developing, and then successfully implementing and administering, a major grant from the U.S. Office of Education. Follow-up activities are now being planned to develop additional resources in this area. This, I believe, is another example of meaningful action on the part of the Association, to meet a perceived need of members.

Another major issue we are well aware of today is the role relationship between art educators in the schools and artists in the community. There are already many facets to this diamond in the rough. It is but one part of a broader issue-art vis-a-vis arts-that I will mention later. For many reasons, including financial support by the National Endowment for the Arts and other federal, state, and local funding sources, this past decade has seen a growing emphasis on the artist-in-the-schools program. A number of leaders from this Associ- ation, including our past president, El- liot Eisner, have addressed this issue

and pointed out emerging areas of concern and opportunity to art educators. Our Association provided testimony to the National Endowment for the Arts on possible redirections of this program. Meanwhile, all problems have not been resolved. The po- tentials of artists-in-schools programs have not been fully attained. We all know of good artists-in-schools programs, and also of other programs where problems have developed. To identify positive aspects of programs where art teachers work with artists in short-term consultancies or in long- term artist-in-schools or CETA re- sidencies, the NAEA, again, in this past year, has initiated an action program. We applied for, and received, a grant from the National Endowment for the Arts for a developmental con-

ference to explore the possible areas of misunderstandings between artists and artist-teachers. The conference, held last summer in the Center for Continuing Education at the Univer- sity of Notre Dame, included a series of meetings, discussions, and in- quiries between NAEA members and other related constituencies-artists, art agency representatives, school boards, and the general public, to explore more productive cooperative



ventures between artists and school art programs. A new publication of the Association, Artists, Teachers, Perspectives, deals effectively with lingering concerns that artists will re- place teachers. It provides art teachers with insights towards initiat- ing, controlling, and evaluating artist- in-schools programs in their districts.

Another major issue and area of concern being attended to by the As- sociation relates to the future of the profession-and to the future of our society. In the New York Times Mag- azine of March 9, 1980, Alvin Toffler, author of Future Shock, in discussion of his newest book, The Third Wave, projects some interesting viewpoints of the future. By "third wave" Toffler refers to the major changes in human history-the first being triggered 10,000 years ago by the invention of agriculture, the second beginning some three centuries ago by the In- dustrial Revolution. Toffler charac- terizes the third wave as resulting

from today's industrial system col- lapsing under the impact of yet another wave of historic change-the crisis of our time affecting our values, economics, political organizations, and family structures. Toffler predicts a society far less child-centered than our own. The aging or "graying" of the population in all high-technology countries implies greater attention to the needs of the elderly and a corre- spondingly reduced focus on the young. "A baby born tomorrow," Toffler states, "may well enter a society no longer obsessed with-perhaps not even terribly interested in-the needs, wants and psychological development of the child." Soon only 30% of adults will have school-age children.

Even if Toffler's assumptions are only partially correct, this suggests implications of growing concern to us-and to the entire educational profession.

A new publication of the Associa- tion anticipates and addresses this need. It is Lifelong Learning in the Visual Arts: A Book of Readings, edited by NAEA Board member Pearl Greenberg, Don Hoffman, and Dale Fitzner. This publication grew out of a training conference on arts for the rural and isolated elderly held last summer in Washington and Reston under the joint sponsorship of the Na- tional Art Education Association and the University of Kentucky.

I've reviewed four major concerns of our profession-art and basics, art and careers, artists-in-schools, and arts and the aging. Each issue has been, and should continue to be, addressed by our Association through conferences, publications, and policy statements. These are major issues of our time, but-as we are all aware- there are others. And, I'd like to comment briefly on a selected few.

The first of these is the conundrum that occurs whenever the word art be- comes the non-word arts. Today, we seem to be confronted by this plural version wherever we look, especially in the world of organization ac- ronyms. AAE means the Alliance for Arts Education; A.I.E. stands for Arts in Education; AEA for Arts, Educa- tion and Americans; NCAH for Na- tional Committee * Arts for the Handicapped; AAA, American Al- liance for the Arts; NEA for National Endowment for the Arts, and on ad infinitum. I'm not speaking in criticism of any of these organizations, since we acknowledge the fact that we

are economically and politically-and occasionally aesthetically-stronger when we speak with a unified voice. I have yet to meet the artist-pardon me, the visual artist-who did not respect and respond to the other art forms of music, drama, and dance.

The kinship between each art discipline is real; the mutual respect and need for mutual support is actual; but the frequent use and misuse of the term "arts" does not always engender a positive response from any members of the professional art education associations. The term "arts" has ac- quired bureaucratic shape and political identity. Writing in the November, 1979, Commentary, Ronald Berman, former chairman of the National En- dowment for the Humanities, defines art as meaning creativity and the history of achieved things from Altamira to the present. He defines arts-or "the arts"-as implying creativity . . . and federal policy for the distribu- tion of funds for purposes "felt" to be artistic. In the politics of arts, Berman goes on to say, "Funds are distributed to organizations created by the distri- bution of funds."

These kinds of concerns and con- siderations cause the art educator to examine carefully his or her relationship to arts-based organizations and to sometimes ask: "Oh, arts, what crimes have been committed in thy name?" As an example, on more than one occasion, I have heard it implied-by "arts" proponents- that the presence of an art or music specialist in a school doesn't necessar- ily mean that a good art or music program exists. This may, on rare occasion, be true-but I believe that an "arts" program is more than the sum of its parts only if each art is in place-and by this, I mean an art, music, dance, and/or drama specialist on the school staff. And I say: the more, the merrier. All arts programs need to grow, but this growth must not occur at the expense of an art area already in place. If we are to move arts education beyond the search for a warm and fuzzy feeling, we need to strengthen each art form through advocacy for trained art specialists who combine child-centered concerns with content area competency. We need to identify networks between varied combinations of the individual art dis- ciplines where integrity is as important as integration.

Related to this point is a recent survey on educational goals reported in the January, 1980, issue of Educa-




tional Leadership. Of 11 goals ranked across groups that included elementary, middle school, and high school teachers, Women's Club members, shoppers, high school students, and citizens groups, all ranked creative activities at the lowest level. The researchers noted that ". . . creative activities involves giving students the opportunity to become involved in activities that might be creative, such as painting a picture, acting in a play, or writing an article. It does not," he notes, "involve any qualitative meas- ures of these activities."

A similar survey in Wisconsin measured the opinions of 444 ran- domly selected Wisconsin residents on 18 educational goals. This study, reported in the October, 1979, Phi Delta Kappan, also listed the arts- related goal as lowest in priority.

Perhaps a key to our continuing low esteem in the eyes of our citizenry is related to qualitative levels-or the lack thereof. Let me clearly state my belief that quality art programs-in each art area-will occur with regu- larity only when specialists are in place. Let me also state clearly that, while I have encountered some less than exemplary art programs, I know of none presented by professional, concerned art teachers who are members of this Association.

Some of the emerging critics of education state that the schools should concentrate on doing only what they do well. To this I would re- ply: Visit the "good" art class; this the schools do well.

Now let me address another central issue directly related to the future of our Association and profession: the need to marshall our energies and di- rect our attentions on .efforts to support, "strengthen," and extend "art as a discipline in the schools and to affect positively the role of art in the culture." These words are from the preamble to the NAEA Constitution, the constitution that guides a growing and complex association of profes- sionals, an association that is increas- ing in numbers and in diversity.

Our membership can no longer be analyzed only in terms of professional role irrespective of our level of teaching-elementary, secondary, higher education, or whatever. We each have qualitative differences, differences of age, sex, color. Some of us prefer to draw, some to throw on a wheel, ink a copper plate, work at a loom, engage in research. These varied allegiences could, if not viewed in

the broader context of our profession, affect our organization's ability to govern ourselves productively. We need to be aware of the dangers of fragmentation and disarticulation whether that be in highly-charged rhetoric or socio-political issues, in egoism, localism, or in the general confusion of complexity. Our Associ- ation must not permit itself to be used as an instrument for various non-art socio-political ends, no matter how worthy. We must be wary of becoming an amalgam of competing sub- organizations where we lose sight of the major purpose of NAEA-to strengthen and extend art as a discipline in the schools.

At the closing ceremony at this year's winter games in Lake Placid, Lord Killinan, head of the Interna- tional Olympic Committee, said: "This Association cannot solve the problems of the world," a statement easily transferable to our Association. We must however, solve problems related to our ability to regulate ourselves for the benefit of the individual art teacher, the viability of the Asso- ciation, and the well-being of the profession. When this is attended to, we will be able to better focus our limited energies on solving the problems of our profession.

I must confess to being somewhat sensitive to criticism of our Association-that fragile flagship of our profession-for I know firsthand of our pressing needs and problems. I also know of the depths of commit- ment of the elected leadership of this Association-and of the energies and abilities of the professional staff that serves us. I know that we are less than 10,000 in a population of 220 million, but I also know-from meeting with many individual members at numerous state meetings over the course of the past few years-that this Associa- tion is 10,000 unique, resourceful dedicated individuals who ask that their association steer a steady course and a searching course, that we combine integrity with imagination, that we provide leadership for the profession. This we will continue to do.

In this realm of governance, we are currently discussing with broadly- based input from membership, proposed new changes in our governance organizational structure. In other continuing efforts to improve aspects of the Association, the Board is consid- ering various means to make our periodicals even better in areas of both aesthetic and content quality.

I've talked of many things today, of the many activities of our Associa- tion, of the need to regenerate our sense of unity, and of the numerous rationales for the place of art in the curriculum. As a closing note, I believe there is a need to distinguish, with more clarity, those art education rationales we believe to be primary and those that may be considered of secondary importance.

Rationales that speak of expression, individuality, and humaneness must be viewed in relation to those that serve other learnings and other needs. The argument for art education must transcend art's role as clarifier or motivator for other subjects in the school, important as these roles may be to the total learning process. Mul- tiple rationales may further substantiate the worth of our profession, but I view the primary, over-arching reason for art in the schools to be its cruciality to each individual's growth and development as a human being. Any person who has had opportunities to observe the intent expression on a child's face while creating art or has shared the quiet pride of children as they solve problems with crayon or clay, knows that the values of art education transcend the limitations of our existing accountability indices. The values of art education are to be found in the development of the total child in all of the categorized "domains" of learning that some call cognitive, af- fective, and psychomotor.

In what other area of the school curriculum can any one subject matter area so effectively enable children to know, to feel, to do? In what other single curriculum area is the imagination so effectively developed; the non-verbal thought processes so productively nurtured; the ability to transform ideas and feelings into tan- gible form so readily facilitated; the interrelationships of nature so easily conveyed; the wonder of the world so beautifully revealed . . . and all with a crayon, a piece of clay, and a sensitive teacher of the critical aspect of a basic education that we call art?

Kent Anderson is curriculum specialist, art education, Milwaukee Public Schools, Milwaukee, Wiscon- sin, and president, the National Art Education Association.

Presidential Address presented at the Na- tional Art Education Association National Convention, Atlanta, Georgia, April 1980.




presidential address

Documents