• E-mail
• Print
• Comment
• Font Size
• Digg
• del.icio.us
• Discuss article

EDITORIAL: Becoming a Researcher in Art Education: Constructing Theory Based on Research

Posted on: Sunday, 1 August 2004, 06:00 CDT

This is the final editorial of a four-part series about the concerns of new researchers. Perhaps the most important work of conducting research is the development of theory. I certainly cannot do justice to all of the complex processes of theory development here. But, in a series such as this, it seems important to point out that although theory construction should be understood as a highly interactive, communal process, the writing of theory is based on focused and extended research activity by individuals and is, in a sense, a product of it.

Art education is remarkably under-theorized as a profession, particularly considering the fact that art educators are developing a history of research (as illustrated, for example, by this year being the 45th anniversary of this journal) and considering our relationship to the theory-laden fields of social science and the visual arts. In part, this is the case because the development of theory requires professionals to work together toward the same theoretical goals, and although many researchers in the field have done research on similar topics, few in the past have done it with the deliberate intent of developing theory. Rather, art educators have tended to conduct research to describe and influence practice by example, circumventing the theory building part of the process. Because we use other fields as resources, many art educators have not thought it necessary, or even possible, to develop a theory (or theories) of art education. However, if we are going to continue to do research in art education, and if we expect the field to increase in sophistication, we must understand that theory development is a critical part of the research process.

It is the relationship between theory and practice that promotes the critical dialogue and establishes the fluid boundaries of a professional field, connecting members of the field through their collaborative development of this relationship, and helping to establish a professional community. Theory is developed as a result of practice and theory also informs practice. Even when professionals are not consciously aware of the many ways in which theory influences their practice, theory has had an influence through, for example, professional education. Also, researchers depend on theory to frame their studies. Literature reviews conducted at the beginning of a research project are done in large part to provide a theoretical framework for research, to place a particular study in the context of the broader range of similar types of research done in the past and to critically reflect on that past.

The construction of theory is similar in some ways to the construction of knowledge. Based on various types of information and evidence, theory is built through both evolutionary and revolutionary extensions of previous knowledge. To theorize from research means to broaden or extend knowledge from the particular to the general through the construction of an internally consistent argument based on evidence. Synthesizing theory (some of which come from other fields) is part of the process of developing new theory.

The idea of generalizing in the arts or social sciences cannot carry with it the assumption that theories will establish a single truth that will end discussion. Rather, theoretical models and propositions provide us with something to talk about. We hypothesize in order to lay the groundwork for theory, study the hypothesis to empirically or philosophically "test" it, and then generalize based on what we have learned from the process to that point. Because people, the arts, and even our research practices change, theory changes as we learn from research.

To take steps toward developing theory, a researcher can undertake research that will support previous theory, challenge it, or build upon it. For example, in this issue, Hicks builds upon theory by using philosophical constructs of play to develop ideas in art education. Darts's article is based on an argument for reconsidering social theory from an art educational perspective. Garoian and Gaudelius suggest that foundations of social theory must be checked against the creative and critical processes involved in artistic processes.

In art education, an important determination of the robustness of theory involves educational practice. As James demonstrates with her empirical study, theory can be supported through new analyses of classroom practices. By building upon theory, a researcher can add to conventional models, which Vallance does here for museum education. And, Taylor seeks to promote theory development by "testing" emergent ideas about hyperaesthetics in an art education context.

In the first of the editorials in this series, I spoke of the difference between research goals that take researchers in art education out on a limb and those that aid researchers in building the trellis that supports the field. Theory is needed to help frame both types of research goals as well as educational practice. To develop theory in art education, we must be able to say something about how art education shapes the ways people think, see, and act in the world.

Kerry Freedman

Senior Editor

Copyright National Art Education Association Summer 2004

More News in this Category