Learning through artworks

This post discusses the possibilities of artworks in facilitating learning and alternate ways of imagining the world. I draw upon the work of Maxine Greene and John Dewey to explore the proposition that children’s learning through artworks has the potential to challenge dominant discourses, opening up new ways of thinking and being. There is also a resource list for educators and parents interested in incorporating artworks into children’s learning.

Amalia Pica’s ‘A ∩ B ∩ C’ (2013). © Amalia Pica. I found this bad boy on the Guggenheim online archive.

“It is not that the artist offers solutions or gives directions. He nudges; he renders us uneasy; he makes us (if we are lucky) see what we would not have seen without him. He moves us to imagine, to look beyond” Maxine Greene (2000, p. 276).

Artworks can be used in many ways for many different reasons in learning contexts. They offer rich possibilities for experiencing and imagining the world from new and multiple perspectives. Visual art as well as the arts more generally, have the ability to make people aware of different ways of thinking and being in the world, working against reductionist and singular ways of thinking.

Maxine Greene (2000) extends upon the word of John Dewey (1916, 1934, 1954) to argue that imagination and the arts play a critical role in the making of democratic communities. She suggests that school curriculum should aim to prioritise the ‘releasing of the imagination’ through providing rich aesthetic experiences for children. These then provide new modalities for children to sense, experience and learn through the world.

However, the mere presence of artworks in a learning environment does not guarantee that a child is encountering or imagining the world in new ways. Greene argues that if school curriculum is to support imagination through the arts, children’s encounters need to be aesthetically varied, rich and reflective. Through this, learning through artworks has the potential to challenge dominant discourses and ways of thinking. This may then encourage children to question their understandings and assumptions about the world, to think critically about what is and what could be.

Below is a list of resources for educators and parents who may be interested in incorporating artworks in children’s learning at home or in the classroom.

Resource list 

Many of the major modern and contemporary art museums have online digital archives for their collections. Here are some links to my favorites:

Online art museum collections

• MoMA’s online collection

The Museum of Modern Art has made 77,000 works from 25,000 different artists available online. The search engine is easy to use and you can refine your hits using different classifications and time periods.

• The Tate online collection

Tate also have an extensive online collection featuring artworks, exhibitions, videos and artist journals. The digital archive is well referenced and has many tags that are great for getting lost in amazing artwork worm-holes. The search engine is easy to use and has lots of search filter options. Tate’s most famous artworks feature extensive summaries, a copy of the artwork’s display caption as well as the techniques used to produce the artwork, for example Marcel Duchamp’s ‘Fountain’ page. 

• The Guggenheim also has an extensive digital archive.

Video Channels

• TateShots  and TateTalks– Tate have also put together two quite an exceptional collection of video and audio recordings. TateTalks features video footage of talks and events held at the art museum. TateShots comprises of artist interviews, performance pieces (I highly recommend watching Earle Brown’s ‘Calder Piece‘), exhibition films and artist studio visits. If I had a dollar for every minute I spent watching TateShots I would be a millionaire. But I work in children’s education and the arts so maybe I shouldn’t put a monetary value on the amount of time I procrastinate.
• The Louisiana Museum of Modern Art in Denmark has a constantly growing online collection of videos from different fields such as art, architecture, music, literature and design. I love the Louisiana Channel as it features a lot of Scandinavian and European contemporary artists who I have only discovered through watching these clips.
• The art auction houses of Southeby’s and Christie’s both have YouTube channels featuring short video clips of artist interviews, studio visits and world auction records.

Online courses

• MoMA has developed three online courses that explore inquiry-led learning through artworks. Admittedly I have not had a chance to do any of these courses but I think it worth a look. The first, ‘Art & Ideas: Teaching with Themes’ uses theme-based teaching practices to support educators in incorporating modern and contemporary artworks into curriculum. Then there is Art & Inquiry: Museum Teaching Strategies For Your Classroom looks at museum education strategies for inquiry-based teaching and how these can be used in classrooms. Finally, Art & Activity: Interactive Strategies for Engaging with Art builds on content from courses one and two to explore activity-based strategies for using artworks primary and secondary lesson plans.

Article

• Here is a link to Dr. Emily Pringle’s article on ‘The Artist as Educator: Examining Relationships between Art Practice and Pedagogy in the Gallery Context.’ Emily is Head of Learning Practice & Research at Tate & also my awesome co-PhD supervisor.

References

Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and Education. New York, Macmillan.

Dewey, J. (1934). Art as Experience. New York, Minton, Balch.

Dewey, J. (1954). The Public and Its Problems. Chicago, IL: Swallow Press.

Greene, M (2000). ‘Imagining futures: the public school and possibility,’ Journal of Curriculum Studies, vol 32(2). P.267-280.

The role of materials in children’s learning through art

This post discusses the possibilities of materials and material play in children’s learning through art. I draw on the theories of loose parts and new materialism to argue that materials, including artworks, play an active and participatory role in opening-up divergent thinking and inquiry-led learning in schools, home and informal learning contexts such as art museums.

Why do materials matter?

Materials and material exploration have long been a part of artistic inquiry. Since Frobel’s development of the kindergarten in the late 1700’s, they have also held an important place in early childhood settings. In the 1970’s Simon Nicholson presented the theory of loose parts – the proposition that young children’s creative empowerment comes from the presence of open-ended materials that can be constructed, manipulated and transformed through self-directed play. It is fair to say that material content, including artworks and art materials, hold tremendous possibilities for facilitating children’s inquiry-led learning in new and divergent ways. I consider materials to be one of multiple forces that learning can emerge from in an art museums. Others may include social interaction between people, spatial layout of things and the delivery of curatorial content such as through audio guides or information resources.

As reading and writing are often privileged in school curriculum, experimentation with different materials can provide new opportunities for alternate and aesthetically-driven pedagogies to be produced (check out this blog for how I define pedagogy). This is to say that different materials may encourage different ways of thinking, learning and being. For example, in a previous posts on ‘suggesting as a technique for facilitating children’s learning through art’ I talk about the different cognitive, social, emotional and aesthetic learning pathways that two different materials: plastic cylinders and large paper sheets may present. Whilst the cylinders may provoke explorations around stacking, placing, dismantling, balancing, arrangement and construction, the large paper sheet may suggest gentle movements, swaying, rolling, folding, hiding and enveloping. Through experimentation, the properties and abilities of a material may change, creating new starting points for further inquiry and experimentation.

The active role of materials in art practices and learning

In the arts, different materials such as paint, clay, paper, resin, fabric, wood or plastic can be experimented with in a myriad of ways. In art forms such as dance, live art and socially engaged practices, materials may be slightly more abstract such as the human body, sound, participants and society. I believe that art materials are not just a tool for self-expression or a thing for children to manipulate; they are an active and participatory force in the production of learning and knowledge. For example, check out this lovely video by visual artist Shirazeh Houshiary in which she talks about the active role of materials in her practice:

I really connect with this, especially the comment: “… they are not representation of the form but a pulsation of the form. I am not interested in painting. I am not interested in the processes of making in the conventional sense of representation. I am trying to get into how something works. This process has taught me a huge amount about who I am, which is surprising. It a process of learning for me more than anything else.” The paint and paintings are active, participatory and dynamic in the artist’s creative experimentation.

Art materials as an invitation to experiment

Material play has the ability to encourage emergent thinking processes, allowing children to produce new understandings as well as experiencing the world from multiple perspectives. However, materials also have the ability to be used in static and predictable ways that shut down creativity and divergent thinking. Whilst I do love Instagram feeds and craft blogs that share ideas for children’s art activities, I am cautious that these may unintentionally encourage imitation and fixed ways of using materials with children. This may then reduce the ability for experimental thinking and practices to emerge.

The challenge to me – and everyone working in learning settings with children – is to keep experimenting, keep questioning, keep venturing into the unknown and the yet-to-be-discovered of art, play, materiality and pedagogy.

I am sure many of you have really interesting insights on this topic and it would be lovely to hear them. Why is children’s play with materials important to you? What are your favorite materials to experiment with?

Further links

The Institute of Making at the University College of London has a great online material library – perfect for anyone who likes to nerd out about different material forms: http://www.instituteofmaking.org.uk/materials-library

My friend Nina Odegard has written a brilliant article on children’s learning with recycled ‘junk’ materials. Nina formally ran a creative recycle centre in Norway: http://www.academia.edu/14201590/When_matter_comes_to_matter_working_pedagogically_with_junk_materials

Professor Pat Thomson, Nina Odegard and I recently did a conference symposium on children’s material play. Check it out: https://louisapenfold.com/2017/12/06/childrens-learning-with-new-found-and-recycled-stuff-symposium-at-aare/

Here is the link to my blog post on Simon Nicholson’s theory of loose parts: https://louisapenfold.com/2016/05/23/simon-nicholson-on-the-theory-of-loose-parts/

I also love the book ‘Encounters with Materials in Early Childhood Education’ by Veronica Pacini-Ketchabaw, Sylvia Kind and Laurie Kocher.

NGV Triennal in Melbourne, Australia

This post looks at the National Gallery of Victoria’s slick new ‘Triennal’ blockbuster exhibition, including the gallery’s dedicated children’s space ‘Hands on: We make carpet for kids.’

I have spent the past few weeks in my hometown of Melbourne, Australia escaping the bleak English winter. During this time I have been fortunate enough to break up my thesis writing with beach swims and time with family and friends.

Last week I headed into Southbank to checked out the National Gallery of Victoria’s new contemporary art exhibition, Triennial. The exhibition is the first of what I presume will be a series of exhibitions held every three years that aim to showcase ‘the world of art and design now.’ The day I visited, the gallery was absolutely heaving with visitors young and old. I had actually never seen so many people inside an Australian art museum before. It was great to see the gallery so full of life.

The Triennial features an array of new modern and contemporary artwork from around the globe. There are also a bunch of newly commissioned, super slick, very Instagram-able installations including Kusama’s ‘Flower obsession,’ Ron Mueck’s ‘Mass,’ teamLab’s “Moving creates vortices and vortices create movement’ and Alexandra Kehayoglou’s beautiful ‘Santa Cruz River.’ The show is ambitious, polished and lively.

Pictured: teamLab ‘Moving creates vortices and vortices create movement’ (2017)

Yayoi Kusama ‘Flower Obsession’ (2017)

Ron Mueck ‘Mass’ (2016-2017)

The Triennial’s dedicated children’s space, ‘Hands on: We make carpet for kids’ (2017) was comprised of four parts: a colourful wall where children could stick on triangular velcro pieces, a ‘maze challenge’ where children could poke pieces of rope through a plywood wall, an area where children could stick styrofoam pool noodles onto wooden knobs and a floor activity where children could make patterns using colourful wooden triangles (pics below). At first glance, the space looked immaculate. Lots of colours, beautiful wall-mounted installations for children to look at. The space was packed with young families who all seemed to be having lots of fun. It was also really inspiring to see the gallery making such significant financial investments in children’s activities. There appeared to be a gallery staff member stationed at each section greeting people and sorting materials.

At the same time I felt like something fundamental was missing from the children’s activities. While in the space I began to consider what exactly it is I love about art and learning. To me, the arts and education have allowed me to continuously think about and connect with the world in new and different ways. Artistic experimentation has allowed me to produce new relationships between myself, other people, ideas and the world around me. Looking at the children’s activities, I felt like there were limited opportunities for children to engage in deep artistic and creative experimentation. For example, in the rope activity, children were presented with small pieces of the material all cut to the same length. An instruction sign told people to put the rope into the holes. What children can and cannot do is nearly entirely pre-constructed and fixed.

I am really interested in children’s learning environments that are designed to encourage creative experimentation and are responsive to what emerges from this. For example, selecting materials based on their ability to transform (for example, clay has the ability to change form through adding or removing water), introducing art tools, equipment, artistic techniques or different conceptual resources that could encourage people to extend, challenge and complexify their thinking through art over time.

At the same time, everyone seemed to be having fun and perhaps that is the most important thing. Also, due to the sheer volume of visitors, the gallery may not have been able to cope with children spending more than two minutes on each activity.

The NGV Triennial is a fun museum experience. There are also some incredible artworks in the exhibition. High-brow theme park or contemporary art show – you decide!

5 great children’s learning spaces in the Bay Area, California

I was fortunate enough to recently spend a month in California, mainly in and around San Francisco. During this time I visited a handful of children’s learning spaces and met with a bunch of lovely, passionate people working in both formal and informal learning contexts. The places listed below are places that I visited or that came highly recommended. I hope you find these equally as inspiring as I did!

A crazy drawing/painting machine/printer that appears to be programmed by a Raspberry Pi on display at The Exploratorium.

The Brightworks School

Founded by Gever Tulley who also started The Tinkering School, Brightworks is a project-based learning heaven that ‘weaves learning and life experiences together.’ In the every day runnings of the school, children are put into mixed-aged group teams and encouraged to investigate real-world problems collectively. ‘The Arc’ (I interpret this term to mean the pedagogical principles that drive the learning processes at the school) consists of three phases: exploration, expression and exposition. Learners move through these cycles, allowing for the development, integration and contextualisation of skills and knowledge.

Interested in hearing more about this approach to learning? The Brightworks school run a ‘Brightworks Curious Educators Tour’ approximately once a month that you can book into. Details can be found on their website. Gever also has an awesome TED talk on ‘life lessons through tinkering’ that looks at children’s experiences at The Tinkering School.

AltSchool

Max Ventilla, a former Google executive, created Altschool after he could not find an appropriate school to send his daughter to. Altschools are lab schools that utilise an array of new technologies to create personalised learning environments for its students. Fundamentally opposed to the American government’s standardisation curriculum, AltSchooler’s learning is driven by their interests, passions and skills under a ‘Common Core’ curriculum. Nicknamed ‘Montessori 2.0,’ the schools works closely with entrepreneurs and engineers to develop new technologies that allow students and teachers to grade and document learning in diverse ways. The New Yorker published an extensive article, ‘Learn Differently,’ on the startup last year. I also found this talk by Max Ventilla particularly informative.

Unfortunately I was unable to visit AltSchool while in SF. I was/still am really interested in learning more the relationship between assessment and the development of the apps being used and how these influence one another.

SFMOMA

The San Francisco Museum of Modern Art re-opened in 2016 after major renovations. An epicenter for contemporary art in the Bay Area, the art museum is also a sensory-rich environment for young audiences. From my understandings the museum does not run specific programmes or have a dedicated area for children but there is an array of artworks that may capture the curiosities and imaginations of children. These include Dan Flavin’s luminous installation on level 5, Richard Serra’s ‘Sequence’ and Morris Lewis’ technicolour ‘Untitled’ painting (pictured below). With such an incredibly diverse and amazing mix of modern and contemporary art, it seems like the museum has great potential to further develop children’s learning programmes in the future. The Gallery has also put together an online museum guide for visiting with the little-ies.

Morris Louis, Untitled. 1959-1960. Magna on canvas. 98 in. x 140 1/2 in. © Estate of Morris Louis

The Children’s Creativity Museum 

Deep in the heart of SOMA’s Yerba Buena Gardens sits the Children’s Creativity Museum. The museum features an array of different ‘labs’ such as an animation studio, a tech lab, a music studio and community lab that aim ‘to nurture creativity and collaboration in all children and families.’ The day I visited, the museum was pumping. It is clearly a popular destination for young families living in San Francisco with lots of activities for children to play and make in. The museum certainly has a slightly commercial feel to it, as I often find in American children’s museums. An additional after thought I had was in relation to the separation of the different labs. I wonder what would happen if the tech lab, music studio and community lab became one big space for making and exploring across disciplines and art forms? Check it out: https://creativity.org

The Tinkering Studio at the Exploratorium

You might notice I write a lot about the Tinkering Studio on this blog but it is just because I truly believe in inquiry-based learning through play, which is what they do so brilliantly. Housed in The Exploratorium and overlooking the sparkling Bay, the museum’s mission is “to create inquiry-based experiences that transform learning worldwide” through explorations of science, art and human perception. The Tinkering Studio is not just for young children, it is a space for everyone to play, make, construct and deconstruct ideas and understandings about the world.

A pic taken in a light play/Scratch Jnr activity in The Tinkering Studio. 

I really connect with The Tinkering Studio’s emphasis on curiosity as the driver for learning. This manifests itself in numerous ways including visitor’s learning during drop-in activities, teacher’s learning at professional development workshops and also (and maybe most importantly) in relation to the learning of the museum team. As an outsider I see it as a continuous process of learning together and that is inspiring. At the same time, the understanding of learning underpinning the practice seems so much more complex than just giving children agency. The activities on offer such as the marble machines, wind tubes and paper circuits are well-considered ‘problem spaces’ where explorations of interconnecting concepts happens through material experimentation. I saw a great quote on the wall of the museum by the American artist Jasper Johns:

“When something is new to us, we treat it as an experience. We feel that our senses are awake and clear. We are alive.”

I related to this concept that new experiences and ideas keep our minds and bodies awake. Also that one’s desire to continuously strive for what is yet to come into existence or be discovered is a life force. The Tinkering Studio also has a great blog that the team use to share projects and ideas.

There is an array of other innovative startups/play/learning spaces in and from the Bay Area not mentioned above. To name a few: the Bay Area Discovery Museum, Wonderful Idea Co., the Khan Lab School, GCE Lab School, the Berkeley Adventure Playground and the Museum of Children’s Arts. I also highly recommend the Prelinger library for their ‘how to’ and ‘maker’ sections. The library is also a great place to get some general life inspiration. Can’t wait to visit California again!

P.S. Thank you Ryan Jenkins for the awesome recommendations!

In conversation with Reggio Australia’s Chris Celada on art, galleries and the Hundred Languages of Children

This post is an extract of a conversation between myself and Chris Celada published in the current edition of ‘The Challenge,’ Reggio Emilia Australia’s quarterly journal. Chris is a teacher and Reggio Australia editorial board member. The article accompanied a case study in which I discussed the pedagogical and artistic underpinnings of an early year’s paint/coverage art studio, or ‘atelier’, run as part of my PhD fieldwork. The Atelier was shaped around an inquiry into Peter Lanyon’s ‘Glide Path’ painting. This conversation offered both Chris and I the opportunity to dig deeper into the philosophies, strategies and practices of working at the intersection of art and pedagogy. 

Chris Celada: I am excited about the opportunity your article offers for deeper thinking and reflection. For many teachers, art is a ‘problem’ seeing themselves as not ‘artistic’. They provide ‘art’ experiences for children but perhaps do not recognise the power of ‘art’ to influence/ construct/challenge thinking for the children but also for themselves – to experience the power of ‘languages’. It is for these reasons that I think your article is very powerful. As I read your article, a variety of ‘questions’/ points of interest came to mind and I would be interested in what you might like to consider further as well. So as they say, let’s start at the beginning!

I saw links between your processes and those from the Reggio Emilia approach that I have read about, observed and now seek to practise. In particular, I noticed the cross-over with the project Children, Art, Artists: The Expressive Language of Children, the Artistic Language of Alberto Burri (Reggio Children, 2004) and Mosaic of marks words materials (Reggio Children, 2015).

You started your research with the adults considering Peter Lanyon’s painting ‘Glide Path.’ I discovered that this painting is one of a series of paintings made in response to his experiences as a glider pilot. When I knew that, I had a much more powerful way of entering into this painting. His larger body of work is beautiful and evocative, for example ‘Thermal’ (1960), ‘Drift’ (1961) and ‘Soaring flight’ (1960).

One reviewer compares the sudden changes in colours and textures, tilting axes and sharp changes in direction of marks in the paintings to the flight experience – an experience that in the end killed Lanyon. Another describes Lanyon as being “compelled to push things to extremes”, and rather than being concerned about form, space and colour, his painting are “about living and feeling outside the canvas”. Perhaps he would have felt empathy with Reggio Emilia where disruption and working in the unknown is so important.  Peter Lanyon ‘Glide path’ (1964). Oil on canvas.

The first area I would like to dig deeper into is the process of ‘reconnaissance’ that Malaguzzi describes in the The Hundred Languages of Children: The Reggio Emilia Approach (Edwards, Gandini & Forman, 1998, p. 88). How did the group’s decision to focus on ‘coverage’ and its relation to paint emerge from the ‘reconnaissance’ or pre-planning stage? I am curious to hear about the thinking and intentions in this process. Why was ‘Glide Path’ selected? What did you discover about line, form, shape and coverage in considering the painting? Why was ‘coverage’ selected as the focus? What is meant by ‘coverage’ when an artist talks about it? I look forward to reading your comments and what you are interested in discussing.

Louisa:  I really enjoyed reading your questions and thoughts, thank you for sending them through. This conversation is a great opportunity to reflect upon different ideas. To me, discussing theories and practices with others is very useful in bringing together different perspectives and expanding ideas. Or even a bit like shining a torch on different spaces that might not usually see the light!

Before I talk about Peter Lanyon and the Atelier, I will briefly mention some key ideas underpinning this work. At the core of this research/practice is an investigation into how art can be used to construct different ways of thinking. This may include new thought processes, different understandings and relations towards oneself, other people and non-human things like artworks, materials, space and culture. Then to continuously question these understandings, as well as the process of how we arrived at them. This is both a personal and collective process full of contradictions, politics, ethics and emotions… Extending upon this, here are some thoughts in response to your questions:

‘Glide Path’ captures a sensation of flow, freedom and elevated movement over surfaces, space and earth. For me, this painting cannot be reduced to a bird’s-eye representation of the English countryside. It is a feeling of turbulence, rushing motion and emotion, things colliding and intersecting in chaotic ways in a changing moment – a sense of soaring and drifting in unrestricted ways but always with the possibility of falling from a great height. This complexity of thought and affect offered a rich starting point for deeper collective inquiry amongst the team.

Lanyon’s use of paint made it a natural fit to bring into the Atelier as it presented the possibilities for rich tactile and sensory experiences for young children and their families. As a team, we were not solely interested in teaching children about the techniques and properties of paint, such as how to roll it or how to use a paint brush, although these are very important, but to also consider the thought process that this material might provoke, how it might challenge children and their families to think differently through experimenting with it. We were thinking about what a material or artwork may suggest or invite…

‘Glide Path’ offered many possibilities to connect and explore an array of artistic concepts such as line, form and shape. There was something in the combination of ‘coverage’ and ‘flying’ that made a particularly strong pairing worthy of deeper investigation. The action of ‘covering’ seemed intricately connected to a feeling of gliding. Just like the wind changes a glider’s speed from rapid to slow, thought patterns and making in the Atelier continuously flux through different rhythms too – from grand outbursts of paint pouring to gentle drips, quiet consideration and stillness. Like the creative process, the act of gliding is unpredictable – plunging into the unknown, an awareness of freedom, movement but also the possibility of stagnation, disappointment and falling.

The concept of ‘coverage’ was approached as an invitation for children and their families to think with and through. Evidencing a linear relationship between introducing the concept and a child ‘learning what this is’ was never the goal. Instead we began to consider the possibilities for research – social, emotional, aesthetic and intellectual research – with and through the concept and the material.

Such explorations of ‘coverage’ are also philosophical ones. What is presented? What is concealed and protected? What is revealed? How does someone or something transform through different layers being taken away or others being positioned on top? What new relations can be construction between coverage, paint and other complexities of the world?

Chris: I greatly enjoyed reading your comments which set my mind whirling! And I realised that my thinking is intimately connected to experience as is yours! When I looked at a wide selection of Lanyon paintings, the one chosen for the Atelier was not my ‘favourite’. Somehow the colours were ‘wrong’! I found some of the others allowed me to ‘feel’ the movement of the to-ing and fro-ing of the glider; to feel what I imagined as the ‘peace’ of being up in the sky, but lines covering blocks of colour, what appears to be areas where very thin layers have been added over other colours, or maybe colour has been ‘removed’ to give that effect. The idea of bringing ‘coverage’ and ‘flying’ together was new for me and very powerful. I have just returned from Europe and I ‘covered’ a lot of sky during the various flights. We had to fly from Dubai to Cyprus. The plane was making deliberate zigzag patterns to stay well away from firstly Yemen, then Syria – in no sense was this the shortest route. We covered a lot of ground. I started to think about the ‘coverage’ I create each day – in my home, at work, in my town, then the ‘coverage’ I create in/of ideas, feelings and relations. I was then reminded of the phrase often used in education in relation to the curriculum ‘we need to cover this/that topic’ so for me the initial question of ‘what is meant by coverage’ has moved far, far away from a lineal concept and now has brought the fonts of knowing spoken about by Reggio Emilia together – ideas around rationality, emotion, imagination and aesthetics and their interconnections and interrelationships that are unpredictable and that have the possibility to disrupt one another.

‘Glide Path’ was more of, as you say, a bumpy ride, unexpected turbulence. Not my ‘preferred’ experience! However, I found that feeling the pleasurable flights in the other paintings, helped me to return to this one and maybe to be willing to have a bumpy ride, a moment of ‘excitement??’, maybe what people call ‘being truly alive.’ I came to realise that I couldn’t look at this painting in isolation, but only in relation to his other pieces. Seeing ‘Glide Path’ in the context of the larger body of work tells a more complex story.

The concept of ‘coverage’ is intriguing. If I look just at this painting I notice one colour covering another, lines covering blocks of colour, what appears to be areas where very thin layers have been added over other colours, or maybe colour has been ‘removed’ to give that effect. The idea of bringing ‘coverage’ and ‘flying’ together was new for me and very powerful. I have just returned from Europe and I ‘covered’ a lot of sky during the various flights. We had to fly from Dubai to Cyprus. The plane was making deliberate zigzag patterns to stay well away from firstly Yemen, then Syria – in no sense was this the shortest route. We covered a lot of ground. I started to think about the ‘coverage’ I create each day – in my home, at work, in my town, then the ‘coverage’ I create in/of ideas, feelings and relations. I was then reminded of the phrase often used in education in relation to the curriculum ‘we need to cover this/that topic’ so for me the initial question of ‘what is meant by coverage’ has moved far, far away from a lineal concept and now has brought the fonts of knowing spoken about by Reggio Emilia together – ideas around rationality, emotion, imagination and aesthetics and their interconnections and interrelationships that are unpredictable and that have the possibility to disrupt one another.

Louisa: For me, Lanyon’s desire to take flight into the unknown as well as the act of distrupting thinking are such powerful human actions that take take real courage to enact. They require a will to let go and not to control; walking into the unknown, into the unfamiliar, the unidentifiable or perhaps swimming out into the ocean until your feet are just off the ground. That’s scary! But it is also where the exciting stuff happens…

continued in ‘The Challenge.’ 

The full version of this article has been published and distributed by Reggio Emilia Australia Information Exchange. To order a copy of the article, you can contact REAIE at: admin@reggioaustralia.org.au or at REAIE 442 Auburn Rd, Hawthorn, Victoria, 3122, Australia.

References 

Reggio Children. (2004). Children, Art, Artists. the expressive languages of children, the artistic language of Alberto Burri. Reggio Emilia: Reggio Children.

Reggio Children. (2015). Mosaic of Marks Words Material. Reggio Emilia: Istituzione of the Municipality of Reggio Emilia.

Ivan Illich on community cohesion and alternate modes of knowledge production

“People need not only to obtain things, they need above all the freedom to make things among which they can live, to give shape to them according to their own tastes, and to put them to use in caring for and about others [1].”

In 1973, Ivan Illich, a Catholic priest and Professor at Penn State University published his epilogue to the modern industrial age. Tools for Conviviality stood as an ode to a need for multiplicity in modes of knowledge production in order to connect individuals with themselves and others in the community. Illich’s argument is built on the premise that the advancement in mass industrial and mechanical production has removed people’s free use of their natural abilities, coming at the expense of human’s connection with themselves and others in the community. Industrial forms of production and education have led to isolation, social polarization and the deterioration of the fabric of community.

Tools for Conviviality came two years after the release of Deschooling Society, Illich’s critique of institutionalised education and his belief of its connection to the institutionalisation of society. Illich is often categorised as a social critic yet this restricts the multidisciplinary nature of his work, which deeply intertwines educational, medical, technological, scientific, social and cultural theory.

Illich’s constructs his definition of conviviality in opposition to industrial production controlled by others:

“conviviality is the autonomous and creative intercourse among persons, and the intercourse of persons with their environment; and this in contrast with the conditioned response of persons to the demands made upon them by others, and by a man-made environment. I consider conviviality to be individual freedom realized in personal interdependence and, as such, an intrinsic ethical value [2].”

He connects this with the notion of ‘tools,’ which are broadly defined not just to include handtools such as hammers, brooms and saws but also extends his interpretation to institutions and systems of production that create intangible commodities such as education and healthcare. Convivial tools permit people to learn in different ways and personalise their lives in response to their own interests and natural abilities, granting people the ability to build the skills needed to connect and synthesise information into original and personalised forms. This then allows for individualised, participatory and meaningful experiences which allow people to work at their own pace and level of understanding, moving away from a ‘one-size-fits-all’ approach. Convivial tools grant man the ability to express meaning through action.

Illicit does not dismiss all necessity for industrial production but rather advocates for a balance in the relationship between what people need to do by themselves and what industry can do for them. When this equilibrium is lost and industrial production takes over, the over-programming of man deadens his creative imagination. A complex balance is therefore needed between industrial growth and alternate individual modes of knowledge production.

“…to the degree that a man masters his tools, he can invest the world with his meaning , to the degree that he is mastered by his tools, the shape of the tool determines his own self-image [3].”

Illich constructs an evaluative framework to analyse the complex theories and ideologies driving the industrial crisis. In this he points to the need for a common language amongst people which can be used to critically discuss the situation from multiple perspectives. Unlike Marx, Illich does not construct his solution on the design of a utopian society. Alternatively he formulates a methodological approach in a series of steps embedded in our current society which allows for the critical reflection. Within this, he emphasises the need for a shift in perception and language people use towards ‘manipulative’ industrial tools in which they take ownership of their tools and recognise their role as active agents in their lives. For example, instead of the education and healthcare system dictating them and how the connect with others, people need to recognise their control over ‘their education,’ ‘their health’ and ‘their transportation.’ Through this, the controlling and standardised nature of industrial production is broken through individual’s defending their own right and need for conviviality and personalised modes of knowledge production within their own lives. Tools for Conviviality exemplifies the necessity of constructing convivial environments within our community. When curating spaces for children in art galleries, it raises the question as to how we can design for a balance of individual creative knowledge production alongside the transmission of existent cultural knowledge and values.

References

1. Illich, I. (1973), Tools for Conviviality, Harper & Row, p.6.
2. Ibid, p.6.
3. Ibid, p.21.

Thinking with your hands: A visit to the Tinkering Studio in San Francisco, USA.

“Instead of just saying: “Go ahead make anything you can imagine”, we are trying to carefully choreograph moments where you enter into a situation and  find something of interest to start with. It is not “whatever” you want to build with our light play setup. We are asking: “What do you notice?” “What are you curious about looking at more?”  “What might you want to change?”  “What might you like to construct now that you have become more familiar with the material?” and so on.”  Mike Petrich [1]

This post features a reflection on my visit to the Tinkering Studio at The Exploratorium in San Francisco, USA with a focus upon what art galleries can learn from the Studio’s approach to constructing immersive creative environments for children based on experiential learning and play. 

Image credit: tinkering.exploratorium.edu

In August 2015 I participated in a ScratchJr/Light Play prototyping session between the MIT Media Lab’s Lifelong Kindergarten group and the Tinkering Studio team at The Exploratorium. The Tinkering Studio, which opened in 2008, is a research and design laboratory housed inside the Exploratorium, a museum devoted to the intersection of art, science and technology. The Studio is an “immersive, active, creative place” [2] for experimentation, investigation, making and hands-on play for all ages. Scientists, artists, programmers and academics frequently take up residence in the studio, working alongside the Tinkering Studio team to create new installations, run programmes and run public forums. I have closely followed the progression of the Tinkering Studio’s programme for a number of years with much admiration. When the opportunity arose to spend an extended period of time in San Francisco, I was eager to connect with the team.

I was particularly interested in learning about two key components of their programme: firstly how an interdisciplinary development team (or ‘communities of practice’) of artists, educators, scientists, programmers, designers and makers, work collaboratively to develop, prototype and construct their creative projects. These projects usually start with a provocation, question or concept that goes through continuous exploration and collaborative development. For example, during the session I participated in, the team were investigating how the Light Play project could be connected with ScratchJr to make usable programmable elements for young children aged 5-7 years. Tinkering activities are not just about putting some art and technology materials on a table and letting kids go nuts, it is ‘highly choreographed, sometimes painstaking, deeply discussed, and a well thought-out discipline, so that we actually can facilitate peoples’ thinking through initial starting points that might lead to complex new  directions.’ [3] Secondly, I was interested in how the team observe, reflect and makes changes to these immersive, creative spaces over time in response to new ideas, new audiences and new contexts in which they are presented.

Throughout the session, we explored and played around with programmable elements such as Arduino boards, circuit blocks and LED lights connected to a new version of ScratchJr app. Through a wireless connection between the parts and the app, we created moving, flashing light vignettes such as this:

After each round of prototyping, the group came back together to share interesting findings such as what worked, what didn’t, what else could be added to the ScratchJr programme and the light materials to enhance the activity and creative possibilities. In this reflective discussion, questioning and exploration were valued above certainty and claims of expertise. During our prototyping and discussions, I observed three aspects of the Tinkering Studio team’s practice which I believe to be key considerations in the future development of creative environments for young children in art galleries:

1) The need for quality social support by educators within the space whose role is to guide and challenge participant’s learning (NB: not direct it). These educators need to be responsive to changing practices in children’s learning and curiosities and make modifications to materials and the arrangement of the space as a result of this.

2) The need to find a balance between the presentation of open-ended materials and structure within the activities. This balance is continuously changing depending upon participants and the context in which they are being presented. Educators and designers need to be aware and responsive to this.

3) The use of open source information sharing. The Tinkering Studio’s team have a frequently updated blog which documents the prototyping, exploration of ideas, new initiatives, successes and failures of projects. The blog is not used as an extended marketing tool (let’s be honest, this is how most art galleries use them) but as a vesicle for generating critical collaborative dialogue and disseminating  discoveries, learning, new partnerships in an immediate and direct way to an international network of makers, programmers, educators, artists and practitioners. These ideas and projects are also shared through publications, public events, Coursera courses and professional development sessions for teachers and museum professionals. Through this, the practice of tinkering is able to become more dialogic, inclusive and internationally widespread. The Exploratorium is also a part of a new international PlayFutures network established to create a global community committed to the explanation of opportunities for young children’s learning through play.

The learning processes explored through tinkering are not just connected to the artistic process. It is the creative process used by artists to explore understandings of the world through experimentation, discovery-based play and expression of these complexities through making. Through my PhD action-research project and work as a children’s curator I hope to bring these aspects more fully into my own practice through developing a collaborative and sustainable dialogic framework between artists, curators, young children and their parents that can be used to construct immersive early years environments in art galleries.

In a city that so strongly values creative innovation, risk taking and original thinking, it seems fitting that it is also home to a place that is championing people’s need to direct their own learning through creative play.

References

1. Petrich, M & Wilkinson, K 2015. ‘What do we want? More replicants or a next generation of students who can think for themselves?’ The LEGO Foundation website, viewed April 10, 2016.
2. Ibid
3. Ibid

Further Links

Flannery, L., Silverman, B., Kazakoff, E., Bers, M., Bont, P. & Resnik, M. (2013) Designing ScratchJr: support for early childhood learning through computer programming. Paper presented at the Proceeding of the 12th International Conference on Interaction Design and Children, New York, USA.

Petrich, M & Wilkinson, K 2014. The Art of Tinkering: Meet 150 Makers Working at the Intersection of Art, Science & Technology, Weldon Owen, Incorporated.

 

 

 

Early Years Fab Lab at The Bay Area Discovery Museum, California

“People need ‘tools’ that empower them to work independently, they need these tools and technology to make the most of the energy and imagination each has… society needs to project individual skills and voices, people need to move, to think and have the means to communicate with one another. People cannot make everything for themselves, they need to collaborate and share in a community for it to function.’ Ivan Illich, Tools for Conviviality (1973).

This post features an interview with Elizabeth Rood, Vice President of Education Strategy and Director of the Centre for Childhood Creativity at the Bay Area Discovery Museum in Sausalito, California  in which she discusses the timeliness, importance and challenges of developing the world’s first early years Fab Lab.

Children and parents create designs using a laser cutter during a prototyping session at the Bay Area Discovery Museum. Image credit: Bay Area Discovery Museum

“We want to shift the way that people think about learning so it is not only based on transmission and close-ended answers. Instead we want to create a rich environment that promotes design, building, construction and an excitement around learning through technology!”  Elizabeth Rood

On May 14, 2016 the Bay Area Discovery Museum will open the first early years Fab Lab designed especially for children aged 3 to 10 years old. The Fab Lab movement came out of the MIT Media Lab in the early 2000’s with the original laboratory aiming to explore how technology can power under-served communities through access to information. Labs typically consisting of a small digital workshop space featuring digitally controlled tools such as 3D printers, design software, laser cutters and technology-powered products which individuals to bring their personal ideas to life. There are currently around 600 labs running around the world in museums, libraries, schools and community spaces. Fab Labs are closely linked, yet distinctly different from the maker, DIY, hacker and open source movements through their focus upon design, engineering and creativity.

I visited the Bay Area Discovery Museum in August 2015 whilst in San Francisco doing an artist residency at the Prelinger Library. I was extremely impressed by the museum’s commitment to child-centred practice and the development of an interdisciplinary creative learning pedagogy based on hands-on play.

Louisa Penfold: Elizabeth thanks so much for taking the time to talk this afternoon. The Fab Lab sounds amazing and I am sure there will be lots of people very interested its development. Perhaps we could start by hearing about the value of creativity in childhood and what unique offerings the Bay Area Discovery Museum provide in relation to that?

Elizabeth Rood: One of the things that people get caught up on is whether or not kids actually can be creative when many definitions of creativity are about having some sort of meaningful output that is not just personal but helpful towards the universe and the world. Yet it is really clear from the research that the quality of kids imaginative play is actually a significant predictor of creativity in their adult life. We actually authored a paper recently and one of the key findings in it was the way in which the quality of kids play in childhood, especially if they are able to access rich environments, ends up equipping them with the creative and innovative skills needed for future success. Therefore a lot of value is placed on making sure kids have really rich creative experiences when they are young that will set them up for life. The other finding from that paper was that it zoned in on seven key teachable skills which allow children to develop into more creative adults.

The research shows that creativity is influenced more by your environment and less so by your inborn genetics… so we are more likely to have our parent’s political views passed onto us than creativity.

So rather than focus on this elusive idea of creativity as an inborn trait, if we recognize that these seven habits of mind that help nurture kids and support their growth, then it will lead to them becoming really creative people.

Here at the museum our mission is all about creativity and in our community work we are helping people see the creative potential in all kinds of thinking across different disciplines and not just art. Certainly art is one area where kids are able to build a lot of creativity but as a museum we really want people to realize that deep thinking in math is about creativity and being a really good scientist is about creativity and being an engineer is about creativity.

3D printers will feature in the Fab Lab. Image credit: Bay Area Children’s Museum

LP: Yes, for sure. I am interested in the comment you made about the link between a rich environment and creativity. From your research and from your experience working in this field, what are the qualities of an environment that constitute a rich experience for children?

ER: A lot of it has to do with whether or not children are empowered and invited to chart their own course or whether a model is put up by adults, or their peers which says ‘this is what is supposed to happen.’  For example, if you walk into an art creation space and there is a model and an attitude which says ‘okay, now you make it.’ Or another example could be in regards to a science experiment where an attitude may be that there is only one way to go about doing it. This idea that one needs to learn what the experts know and mimic it needs to be turned on its head. We need to put kids in the driver seat!

First of all encouraging the idea that there is not one right path or one right answer. A simple example of this is that we don’t ask kids ‘what is 2 + 8?’ we ask them ‘what are all the different ways you can get to 10?’ Even just in a small flip like that, you could encourage the mind to do much deeper thinking. And also you are setting up the framework of their being multiple right answers and through that a value is placed on originality and original thinking and through that we are teaching our kids that they don’t have to mimic the people that have come before them. So that’s a really big piece of a rich environment.

Another aspect is that research clearly demonstrates that cognitive flexibility is a huge part of creativity so the more we can experience new things and expose our children to diverse ways of thinking about the world, the more the brain becomes wired to promote creative thinking, new ideas and awareness.

The final part of a rich environment links back to the importance of pretend play. I think that sometimes people think that pretend play is something we should be doing to ages five or six but then after that comes this social commentary that it’s not healthy or normal to engage in imaginary play. However if you look at people who have one Nobel Prizes and done amazing ambitious things in their lives there is a huge number of those people who had very rich imaginary worlds pushing into their adolescence and adulthood allowing for the construction of rich imaginary worlds. This allows for a different kind of thinking about reality. These are the kinds of a snapshot of experiences that we would like kids to have at the museum.

Children and museum staff play with a programmable car  Image credit: Bay Area Children’s Museum

LP: So leading on from those ideas of cognitive flexibility, process-based learning and pretend play, in terms of the development of the Early Years Fab Lab at the Bay Area Discovery Museum, what sorts of skills will children learn within the space? I say this in the sense that may parents and teachers have great fear around children using screen-based technology such as iPads and computers as they it as passive consumption of media that takes away time from hand-on creative learning. How will the Fab Lab promote creativity and promote creative skills?

ER: I think part of what we are trying to do is establish a new model of what high quality use of technology in the early years can be. A key quality, you know you have visited the museum, there is no technology on site. This is going to be the first piece of technology at the museum. Part of the reason for this is that we want to promote pretend play and rich imaginary worlds and that often screens, media and technology can be set up to say ‘this is the right way, the right answer to this question.’ A lot of the Apps that are out there are close ended, they made have an educational value such as teaching vocabulary, but they don’t tend to be open-ended. So for us, part of us is about making sure that technology is a tool for creation as opposed to passive consumers of the technology. So that’s a huge difference!

Part of the danger of screen time is not the screen itself but the way in which adults are using them as babysitters.

Within the Fab Lab there is a screen that kids design on, more specifically a touch screen which children and parents are able to use side by side. And the experience doesn’t end there, they then fabricate either a 2D or 3D printout of what they designed so they are using the technology as a tool to make something. Part of what Fab Lab does is linking the artistic and design processes with some of the science, engineering and math concepts to help kids build the kind of underlying design thinking that is really critical in fields like engineering or architecture and any human-centred design field.

LP: So what tools and equipment will feature in the Fab Lab?

ER: At the moment we have Surface Pro tablets and the main reason for that is they have both a touch-screen and ability to plug-in and use keyboards or a mouse. So that is the main computer software that we will use. There will also be iPads as some of the software is optimised with them. In terms of fabrication equipment we have laser cutters that can be used with wood, plastic and cardboard. Then there is a vinyl cutter which is fun for making stickers with the little kids, mainly for use with clip art. There will also be 3D printers which will be running in the space but more for demonstration purposes than anything else as it’s not the right tool to use with young children. It’s a real buzz word, especially in the Bay area so it’s important that we can demonstrate the technology.

The other machines we are prototyping with are small C2C routers and table top routers. We will also have an industrial sewing machine which will be fun. Then there will be simpler things that are not so much about fabrication but more about technology and engineering such as circuit and coding games and toys.

LP: I’m curious to hear a bit more about the development of the technology going into the Lab. The design software and high-tech tools used in traditional Fab Labs have been created for adult use. How has the development team built the technology so that it is safe and accessible for young children?

ER: Well, because we are a museum and we need to have robust public programs experience and we also do a lot of work in the formal education sector with teachers, we have a two-pronged strategy of how we are going about this. So in working with schools, there is software that just was released called Fab@School Maker Studio which is really designed for kids ages 9 and up. It’s been built for in school classroom teachers to be able to do building and hands-on learning but not using very expensive fabrication equipment. It is using something that is called the silhouette printer that is a lot more affordable than 3D printers. We are using this software and in conversation with the software developers to simplify the interface such as using a touch screen instead of a keyboard and mouse. So we are developing something new from something that has already been released.

However this software does not necessarily work in the drop-in space as the program is very math based. It needs to be math-based as otherwise teachers would not be able to use it. At the moment in the United States there are only two things are being assessed which are literacy and math. So we are really thinking of how we can use the Fab Lab to do more hands-on learning.

Fab Labs are really at the intersection of active, experiential learning and technology. It is about linking creative, artistic power with science, engineering and math.

In the public program space, this doesn’t really work. Kids need to have something that is elegant and cool in which they can create something to take home and with a bit more of a wow factor in which they think ‘I want to keep doing this.’ So for the public program space we have landed on Adobe Illustrator, partially because it is the industry standard for fabrication and when you use it on a touch screen it automatically simplifies the interface. So it’s naturally more accessible for kids.

LP: What have been some of the most interesting discoveries you have had so far within the development process? 

ER: We have been surprised at how easily kids are using Adobe Illustrator. Kids as young as five have been easily using it and that has been a shock to us. It is really interesting how kids quickly pick up software that has been designed intuitively and elegantly.

Another thing that was really interesting is that parents are more engaged in the early years Fab Lab than they are in other areas of the museum. There is more reciprocal learning going on because it is new for the parents as well. So that has been exciting to see parents jumping in and doing the design alongside their children. Also Dads have been really engaged in the prototyping sessions which is great and we hope that this is a pattern that will continue over the coming months. Overall the adults are really more engaged!

LP: I am sure there will be many people and organisations that will be incredibly interested in your experience of creating the Fab Lab. Do you have any plans to share your findings with the wider community?

ER: Yes, absolutely! We are currently looking into getting funding to get a high-level complex AV system so that we can do remote-in so that people can watch kids in the space from far away. The Fab Lab movement is international and there are people all over the world that are interested in this and part of what we want to do is to share what we learn. This will partially be through the use of video in the space so that people in Belgium, Columbia and Mexico can all watch what is going on. Part of why we are so excited about being part of the Fab Lab movement is because it is international. We will also do writing and presentations to accompany this and possibly a bigger picture research project.

Part of why we are so excited about connecting with the Fab movement as opposed to just the maker movement is that the maker movement has a very open-ended ethos in which children come in and experience what they want. What we are trying to do is build more of a bridge between that open-ended processes and STEM learning. Through this we hope to say that ‘through doing this kind of building, lower income kids from subsidized preschools are learning about shapes in a stronger way that predicts greater achievement over their lifetime.’

A father and son play with cardboard cut outs from a laser cutter during a prototyping session. Image credit: Bay Area Children’s Museum

Further Links

Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2013). Creativity: The Psychology of Discovery and Invention, Harper Perennial.

Fab Foundation website (2016). FabFoundation.org, viewed March 30, 2016.

Heading, H. (2015). Inspiring a Generation to Create: Critical Components of Creativity in Children, Centre for Childhood Creativity, Sausalito.

Singer, D.; Golinkoff, R.; & Hirsh-Pasek, K. (2009). Play = Learning: How Play Motivates and Enhances Children’s Cognitive and Social-Emotional Growth, 1st Edition, Oxford University Press, London. 

TIES website (2016). Teaching Institute for Excellence in STEM (TIES) , viewed March 29. 2016.

Review: Asia Pacific Triennial of Contemporary Art for Kids at QAGOMA, Australia

In this post, Simone Kling gives her top picks from the Queensland Art Gallery | Gallery of Modern Art’s Asia Pacific Triennial of Contemporary Art for Kids (November 21, 2015 – April 10, 2016).  Simone is an artist and gallery educator who has worked in the learning departments at the Denver Art Museum (USA), The Ipswich Art Gallery (Australia) and the Queensland Art Gallery | Gallery of Modern Art (Australia). Prior to pursing a career in gallery education, she worked as an art educator across primary schools in Queensland. 

A family play in Justin Shoulder & Bhenji Ra’s Club Anak (Club Child) at APT8. Image credit: http://2sporks1cup.com

Since 1998 the Queensland Art Gallery (QAG) has been working with artists to develop art projects, programs and interactive installations especially for children and their families. In 2006 the Gallery opened its second site, the Gallery of Modern Art (GoMA), home to the internationally renowned Children’s Art Centre. The children’s program at QAGOMA aims to connect children with contemporary artworks and the creative processes of artists. The Asia Pacific Triennial of Contemporary Art is QAGOMA’s much anticipated flagship display and celebration of contemporary art from the Asia Pacific region. Its most recent iteration, APT8, is a six-month exhibition featuring the work of over 80 artists and collectives who explore the theme of performative art through mediums such as photography, kinetic art, figurative painting, film and installation.

A major draw card at APT8 are the 12 children’s activities featured in the APT8Kids program, all of which have been developed collaboratively between contemporary artists and the gallery team. A unique aspect of QAGOMA’s programme is its approach to working in partnership with artists. This is done through a process whereby the Children’s Art Centre teamwork closely with particular artists in the development and design of the children’s spaces and programs. This not only fuses a stronger connection between child and artist, but also allows artist’s practices to be an integral part of the institution. The activities range from interactive creative spaces, multi-media hands-on installations and play-based environments that expose children and families to different cultures, histories and religions from the Asia Pacific region. All children’s activities are free and open daily 10am-5pm. A sample of the APT8Kids programme is featured below:

Choi Jeong Hwa – The Mandala of Flowers (2015)

Hwa is interested in mass-produced plastic objects and how they can be transformed from the mundane into something with inspiration and beauty. He encourages visitors to make mandala shapes out of various sized bottle caps, which at times of peak visitation, produces a collaborative kaleidoscope of shape and colour. The materials used are incredibly simple and accessible, which makes the activity enormously desirable for teachers and parents to replicate outside of the gallery. Out of all the activities on display at APT8Kids, Hwa’s space has appeared to be appealing to the widest age range. The tactility and overall sensory exposure provides not only children and adults with experiential and play-based encounters, but babies and toddles seemed to be just as captivated with the activity.

Angela Tia Tia – Looking Back (2015)

Tia Tia’s Looking Back installation is made up of four interconnecting spaces where cameras film different aspects of ones body as they pass through. Tia Tia is interested in the visitors seeing themselves in an unconventional way, which at times can become disorientating as the face is intentionally almost always out of view. With the ‘selfie’ obsession so prominent, this space encourages children to interact with a potentially unfamiliar aspect of themself and experiment with their own image. The activity forces children to physically interact with the space, engaging their whole body in a unique way.

Yelena Vorobyeva and Viktor Vorobyev – I Prefer (2015)

Yelena and Viktor’s I Prefer interactive installation features six fruit or vegetable templates and is accompanied by a video of the artists painting a green tomato to appear as a watermelon. Participants are encouraged to do the same with the templates, transforming the mundane into endless possibilities. The activity encourages children to explore creative possibilities within everyday objects, and prompts storytelling through drawing and imagination. Whilst observing the space, I saw  many toddlers and parents working together on their templates, extending the age barrier and providing avenues for parents to collaborate in and facilitate their child’s learning.

Justin Shoulder and Bhenji Ra – Club Anak (Club Child) (2015)

Club Anak taps into every child’s infatuation with creatures and monsters. With various paper templates of fingers, eyes, body parts and miscellaneous shapes all designed by the artists, visitors can create a mythical avatar with the option of taking it home or displaying it in an immersive glowing environment. Adding the Club Anak room to the activity provides younger children with a kinaesthetic and tactile element to their experience as they crawl around the room acting like a monster, and provides older children with the validation of displaying their creations. Not too surprisingly many children decide to add their work to the room, making the space more alluring as it fills with imaginative creatures.

Further Links

QAGOMA website 2015. Children’s Art Centre website, viewed March 15, 2015.

QAGOMA website 2015, Asia Pacific Triennial of Contemporary Art, viewed March 15, 2015.

QAGOMA website 2015, ‘Media Release: APT8 Kids Goes Hands-On at QAGOMA this Summer‘ October 21, 2015.

Cull, Tamsin 2015. ‘Contemporary Art for Kids – Collaborating with Artists and Children’ presentation,‘ Museums & Galleries Queensland Conference (Australia).

Heron, D & Cull, T 2005. Artists Collaborating with Kids, Artlines, Dec 2005, pp. 28 – 33.

Queensland University of Technology (QUT) Museum Collaborative

In addition to the Queensland Museum, the Queensland Science Centre and the Ipswich Art Gallery (formally known as Global Arts Link), QAGOMA was a partner of the QUT Museums Collaborative’s research group (1997–2004). The collaborative worked alongside gallery curators and educators to study young children’s responses and participation in exhibitions and learning programs. The publications and findings from the QUT Museum Collaborative have formed the most significant body of research into early years learning in museums and galleries to date. Please see below for a list of publications. 

Anderson, D., Piscitelli, B., Everett,M. (2008) Competing Agendas: Young Children’s Museum Field Trips. Curator: The Museum Journal, 3, p. 253-273.

Piscitelli, B., Weier, K., & Everett, M. (2003). “Museums and young children: Partners in learning about the world”. In Wright, S. (Ed.) Children, meaning making and the arts.  Sydney:  Pearson.

Anderson, D., Piscitelli, B., Weier, K. Everett, M & Tayler, C. (2002). “Children’s Museum Experiences:  Identifying Powerful Mediators of Learning”, Curator, 45 (3), 213-231.

Piscitelli, B. & Weier, K. (2002). “Learning with, through and about art: the role of social interactions”. In Paris, S. (Ed.) Perspectives on object centred learning in museums.  New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Piscitelli, B., & Anderson, D. (2002).  “Young Children’s Perspectives of Museum Settings and Experiences”.<http://www.fed.qut.edu.au/ec/museums/JMMA-2001.pdf>    Museum Management and Curatorship, 19 (3), 269 – 282.

Piscitelli, B. (2002). Young children’s interactive experiences in museums:  engaged, embodied and empowered learners.  Curator, 44 (3), 224- 229.

Piscitelli, B. & D. Anderson.  (2000). “Young children’s learning in museum settings”, Visitor Studies Today, 3 (3), 3 – 10.

Piscitelli, B.  (1997). “The challenge to enjoy: Young children as visitors in museums”, Journal of Museum Education, 22 (2 & 3), 20 –21.

Piscitelli, B. (2006) “Keeping Queensland museums and galleries on top and out-in-front with programs for children and young people”, Artery, 2 (1), 3-6.

Piscitelli, B. (2003). “Fuelling innovation: starting young”, Artlink, 23 (2), 65-67.

Piscitelli, B., Weier, K., & Everett, M. (2003).  Enhancing young children’s museum experiences:  a manual for museum staff.  Brisbane:  QUT.

Piscitelli, Barbara, F. McArdle & K. Weier (1999).  Beyond Look and Learn:  Investigating, Implementing and Evaluating Young Children’s Learning in Museums.  Brisbane, Queensland University of Technology.