Using Critiques in the K-12 Classroom

In Nancy House's article she discusses the purpose of critique in the art classroom.  Some points which she makes that I also agree with are that a good critique should include positive reinforcement about successes in a work, as well as constructive criticism as a means for making improvements. House also points out a few benefits to both teachers and students in holding critiques:

• to evaluate work
• to assess if a projects objective was fulfilled
• practice for practices sake
• to develop critical awareness
• to learn from self and others

Through engaging in critiques in a K-12 classroom students are able to find out about ones own strengths and weaknesses as well as expanding ones visual aesthetics awareness beyond the arts.  In the article, House also mentions a few different types of approaches to art criticism:

•  Feldman Method- focuses on formal issues such as color, space and design elements
• "Ring around the tub"- personal conversation
• Hartung's Method- students are given cards with descriptive words that they place next to the best example of the word.
• Hildreth Method- "put your two cents in"  students are given pennies and cash them in, in order to discuss a work being critiqued
• Thompson Method/ PQP- Students in this method of art criticism are first praised for successes, questioned further to gain understanding of the work/process, and then other students propose what they would do if it were their work of art.
•  Written responses to works of art
• Number Works- Place numbers on each piece of art to be critiqued.  Students then choose a number from a hat.  Students share one positive statement and one bit of constructive criticism about the work they have chosen.  Then others are encouraged to comment and continue with the critique.

 Of these methods I find the "ring around the tub" to be the least appealing, and not because of it's name.  In this method, the class starts out by critiquing one students work at a time, moving down the line, and normally proves to be long, tedious and boring.  I feel that many teachers still structure their critiques like this, and that all the time spent on them could be much more beneficial. The Feldman method I find to be important to include.  Most critiques have at least some focus on formal issues.  I believe the Hartung method is most helpful in getting students to start thinking about how we look at art and how we associate words with visuals.  I also see useful qualities in the number works method in which everyone's work of art is guaranteed to have at least some response. I also like the emphasis on having at least one positive statement as well as constructive criticism that can aid the artist in producing stronger work.  The Thompson method also appeals to me because I appreciate a structure that starts with praise, or pointing out ones strengths.  After that, questions are asked in order to better understand the artist and the work, and a proposition is given as to what other students would do to strengthen a work if it were theirs.