TEACHERS’ EVALUATION OF CHILDREN’S CREATIVE ART WORKS IN SELECTED PRIMARY SCHOOLS IN NIGERIA

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

1.0        Background of the Study

Artistic evaluation, like other types of educational attainment assessment, is a critical indicator of progress and performance. However, a big issue with art professors has always been their lack of clarity on what should be examined and how criteria should be specified ( Eisner, 1975; Olorukooba, 1990, 1992; ).

Another issue confronting the majority of art educators today is a lack of knowledge on the most suitable strategy to utilize. As a result, teachers use a variety of methodologies and criteria for evaluating and measuring pupils’ creative ability and competency. The challenge for art instructors is exacerbated by their tendency to assume that pupils’ art “products” are signs of development, with little or no regard for how the activity is carried out. This method seems to exaggerate the value of the product at the cost of the process.

According to Mbahi (1999), this approach is detrimental to the learner because it diverts attention away from creative creation and toward worries about the image or item itself. Certain elements of artistic judgment are well-established. For instance, in the psychometric sector, appropriate levels of reliability and validity are available for standardized assessments of ability, aptitude, accomplishment, and attitude (Olorukooba; 1981; 1990). These assessments are intended to evaluate more objectively quantifiable elements of artistic performance and perception, such as creative ability and art products. Attempts at assessment in the 1960s and 1970s (Wallach and Kogan, 1965) met with little success since the measurements focused on qualities of general intelligence that provided no fresh insights into the process of creative performance. While standardized tests are deemed insufficient for evaluating children’s creative art works, there is always a need for the creation of credible measurements of children’s artistic advancement. As Eisner (1975) and Mbani (1999) noted, one significant issue is that real-world creative works are often appraised subjectively. In other words, the only person who can accurately appraise a work of art is the creator. Despite these restrictions, the claim that any type of assessment is suitable in the arts is unsustainable since it contradicts the concept of creative creation. Today, the majority of art educators agree that assessment and feedback, both throughout the process of creating art and on the finished result, are critical components of teaching and learning.

According to researchers in the industry, there are two primary reasons why standardized tests are unsuited for use in the arts: I they focus primarily on assessing the qualities of the individual (producer) rather than on evaluating specific creative outputs within a given piece of work (Amabile, 1983). Gardner and Grinbowan (1986) indicated that standardised exams of art creation, perception, enjoyment, and understanding had reached their limitations in the United States Educational System as a result of this. They suggest a workshop-based method to assessment. This is accomplished via the establishment of an apprenticeship connection between professors and students. Pupils develop creative abilities as they work on important real-world projects under the leadership of instructors, with assessment taking the form of collaborative appraisal of pupils’ work. According to Wolf (1988), this strategy established in the arts has been shown to be effective.

1.1         Statement of the Problem:

Art teachers in our schools are confronted with numerous problems in assessing children’s creative art works, amongst which are as listed below:

1. Art teachers are not too clear of what to assess.
2. Another serious problem in art teaching is the fact that teachers do not know the most appropriate method to use in evaluation.
3. Most teachers are often confused as whether to limit evaluation of children’s work in art to the “process” or “product”.
4. Evaluation of children’s work is subjective in nature, and that teachers lack a

uniform method or format for assessing children’s work in creative art.

Since there is no proper guide or format whereby teachers could use in assessing children creative art works, they often resort to using different methods and criteria in assessing or measuring children’s creative ability in art.

The importance of evaluation in teaching and learning can not be over emphasize. It is only through this medium that a teacher can understand the progress of a child in any teaching subject. Osuagwu (1978) in supporting this view, mentions that like in other subject areas of the school curriculum evaluation in art has always been used to determine the progress of learning and academic performance of students. The difficulty in assessing pupils’ works therefore is mainly due to the subjective nature of the personal art expression of the learner. Challinor (1978) cautions that because art differs from other subject in many ways, evaluation in this subject should consider:

The creative output of learners and the fact that quality is a changing variable. Numerical ratings are given to art works whether produced by children, adolescents or matured students. Tests and examinations are given to learners regularly to build up a continuous evaluation report on learners. The introduction of continuous evaluation by the Federal Government of Nigeria in 1981, in which other internal and external evaluations are combined for the certification and prediction of future performance, makes it necessary to device an acceptable means of assessing art works. The main reason for the introduction of continuous evaluation was therefore the liberalization of our educational evaluation. As contained in the new National Policy on Education, (NPE, 1981), (Section 7.7), “Educational evaluation and evaluation will be liberalized by basing them in whole or in part as continuous evaluation of individual”.

By this system, both the C.A scores of an individual and final examination scores represent the overall performance of the student. This weighted score is believed to truly represent the student’s capacity. The weighted score so derived is subsequently used in decision-making like placement, prediction of future performance and certification among others. However, many educators have expressed doubts as to the reliability of scores often sent to states Ministry of Education. For instance, Osuagwu (1997) and Mbahi (1999), among others also raised objection to the use of these subjective methods in assessing artistic process and method. Because individual art expressions vary, no two individuals are likely to react the same way to the same experience like no two art producers can be exactly the same. The idea of liberalization of evaluation cannot be supported by individual art teacher’s subjective award of grades. There is therefore the need to device more objective criteria for teachers’ evaluation of pupils’ artwork.

1.2         Research Questions:

The questions this research seeks to answer are:

1. to what extent can the rating scales used by teachers in the description of children’s works be mutually agreeable?
2. to what extent will there be any difference in the level of performance of pupil’s by gender?
3. to what extent can we achieve comparability of scores in both private and public schools.

1.3         The Objective of the Study

The major objective of the study was to find out how teachers assess children’s work in creative art.

Specific objectives of this study are as follows:

• To understand or know how teachers assess children’s work in creative art subject.
• The study will enable us to assess children’s creative ability in art by gender.
• To compare the creative ability of children in public and private schools in creative art and
• To suggest or propose a uniform method for assessing children’s work in creative art, for teachers in the primary schools.

1.4         Significance of the Study

The study will highlight the reliability and validity of evaluation scores. This research will help primary school teachers in Kaduna State and indeed Nigeria know methods of assessing children’s work. Teachers training institutions offering art at various levels, (nursery, primary/tertiary) and research institutions like universities might find the result of this study useful.

Research in art education reported inappropriateness of the criteria used by many art teachers in assessing learners’ art work. The studies of Olorukooba (1992), Mbahi (1999), Ozuagwu (1997), Eisner (2002) have shown that an objective criteria should measure parameters like: originality, complexity and participant attitudes (Challinor, 1978). This study will help to re-confirm or otherwise the previous findings in this field.

Literature reviewed has shown that research in this area is scanty. It is hoped that the outcome of this study would be useful to other art educators in teaching and research.

The effect of teacher’s evaluation among boys and girls is of interest to this study. The study would therefore be of significance since curriculum is usually designed for both sexes.

This study is of significance because of the opportunities it offers to learners to work and interact with each other and their teachers. Just like the opportunity offered teachers to interact with learners and other teachers Eisner (1999). It is therefore hoped that this study would promote co-operative spirit among learners and teachers.

1.5         Basic Assumptions:

The following basic assumptions were made of this study:

1. The schools used for this study were representative of the type of primary schools in Kaduna State.
2. The drawing task presented to the respondents is appropriate for their level as prescribed in their scheme of work.

1.6         Organization of the study:

The study has been organized into 5 Chapters: Chapter I is the introduction, which includes the background and justification of the study, statement of the problem and objectives, and the scope and delimitation of the study. Chapter 2 is the survey of the related literature: which includes: concepts of evaluation, types of evaluation, evaluation process, what to assess in children, purpose of evaluation, problems involving children’s evaluation in art education, child’s art, methods of assessing children’s art process and product, qualities of good evaluation in teaching and learning process, summary/conclusion. Chapter 3 is the procedure with explanation on how the research was designed and carried out and the statistical procedure used. Chapter 4 is the analysis of data resulting from the statistical interpretation and discussion. Chapter 5 is the summary, conclusion and recommendation of the study.