C.A. Bowers has proposed a perspective on educational theory and practice involving cultural literacy and communicative competence. Bowers\u27 proposal addresses culture change through a critical examination of activities in the school curriculum. An overview of this perspective and its possible use in art education is presented

Johnson, Nancy R.

English

VCU Scholars Compass

Cu::Lt.l....l.:re Cha.::n..ge: Th~ Work of C_A_ Bo_~rs ~= Ed"U.~at.i~~a.l P~li~y Nancy R. Johnson C.A. Bowers has proposed a perspecti ve on educational theory and practice invo lvin g cultural literacy and communicati ve competence. Bowers' proposa l addresses culture change through a critical examination of activities in the school curriculum. An overview of this perspecti ve and its possible use in art education is presented. This paper will sketch out C.A. Bowers ' views on educat ion al policy, and discuss some implications for art education. Bowers is challeng -ing the foundations of Cartesian thinking which holds individual ism and r ati onal thinking to be superior forms of acting and knowing in the world. Cartesian t hi nking is a deep ly embedded feature of twentieth century Ameri can cul ture. Are art teachers sensitive to the embedded features of culture and the intellec -tual schemata given by language? Bowers' vi ews are particularly re 1 evant in reveal i ng the i nte 11 ec-tua 1 schema ta imbedded ina rt teachers' transmi ssi on of conceptual frameworks for understand i ng the visual arts to children in schools. The Cc>~c:ept. c>f C-u.lture Central to an understanding of Bowers' perspective ;s a concept of culture. Most of us have grown up with the idea that reali ty is objective, but it is also subjec -ti ve, and in part. the manufacture of human beings. Distinguishing between those objects and phenomena that are given in the world by nature and those that are created by human beings ;s problematic . In our concepti on of reality as obj ect i ve • the artifacts of human action such as houses, cars, and printed words on paper are most often perceived w;th the same status as natural phenomena. Human bei ngs make interpretations of nature and create symbolic systems about reality and 83 materia l obj ec ts that are as rea l as objects i n nature. Some concise ways to comprehend culture have been provided by the anthropo logi sts Robert Barrett (1984) and Alan Bea ls (1979). Barrett notes that human beings li ve with symbolic and conventiona l understandin gs which they acquire through observation, imitation, and instruction. From the moment of birth, babies are given family and historical human practices that have been deve l oped over many gene ra-tions. These practices become habitua l and taken-far-g ranted guides for behaving appropriate l y in society. This process of acquirin~ and assimilating the cultural messages or patterns of action and thought handed on by parents and adu l ts i s called enculturat i on. Each individual, however, in terprets and acts upon the genera li zed program of thought and action provided by culture in different ways. Beals states that humans live in cu 1 tura 1 sys terns. These are plans for living made up of traditions, an environment, members, mater i al culture, and a set of maintenance processes. The system operates through cul tura 1 transmi ss ;on wherein ways of proper behavior and the expectations of others are taught and l earned. The transmis-s;on of cultu re is life-long and is different in each culture. Within each cultural system, the messages transmitted to members may not be the same for each one. Vari ed messages can occur among families of di fferent soc i oeconomi c status, differences in the birth order of siblings, and differences between daughters and sons. Also, a culture usual l y provides and transmits alternat ive patterns of action from which on e may choose personal preferences for acting in the world. A consequence of the transmission process is that the child as adult will transmit the cultural message to the next generation. Bowers has utilized the sociolo-gy of knowledge perspective of Peter Berger and Thomas Luckmann (1966) and Alfred Schutz (1970) to deal wi th the phenomenon of cul ture, social patterns of thought, and the socialization process by which the young 1 earn the conceptual patterns and maps provided by their culture. This perspective is compatible with Barrett's and Beals'. Berger and Luckmann and Schutz provide insights about the ways by which socially constructed realities come to structure our act ion in the world and the ways by whi ch '<'Ie come to participate in them. An important point that they make is tha t humans are not fin ished or completed at birth as are animals. Through social interaction with others, the child acquires and internalizes socially accepted patterns of action, a language bearing cultural -ly laden and thus politica l mean -ings, and structures for think.ing about experience derived from the collective distillation of others ' past experiences . Rela..t::iC)n.ship e>£ Cult.ure a..n.d. Society t.o the In.di-v-idua..l A concept needed for understand -ing Bowers' perspective is that of the i ndividual. This concept can be easily confused with individualism. As the recipients of Judeo-Chris -tian, Enlightenment, and Frontier traditions, Americans place great 84 va 1 ue on bei ng your own per s on and carving out a unique niche in the social fabric of society . Conse -quently. we tend to forget, or not recognize at all, that our k.nowledge and actions have not come about solely through our own individual efforts. None of us founded NAEA, formu-lated formalist theories of design, or were part of the community of the Barbizon painters. However, without these actions of our predecessors, we might all be teaching art in different ways. The past actions of other persons have given us a language to communicate ou r ideas about art, exemplars of imagery, and institutions that bring us together as a community. Upon birth, each of rece ived or had access to these events as part of the cultural tradition. 'tJhat is impor tant is what each of us does about these events. Do we accept the consequen -ces of our predecessor's actions as irreversible and take them for granted as inevitable or the "cor -rect" solution to our problems? Can we become aware of those aspects of our communal traditions and cultural patterns that are incongruent and dysfunctional in our existential experience when we use the tradi -tions and patterns of thinking and action in the conduct of our daily lives? The concept of individu a lism as the lone. in de pendent person confronting raw reality does not adequa t e ly account for the place of soc iety and culture in our lives . Culture and tradition link individu -a 1 s together. These patterns and traditions, however, need not be deterministic. We are not puppets jerked about by the strings of cu 1 ture and commun i ty; we can act back upon them. The re 1 at ; onsh; p between individual, soci ety, and culture is dialectical and each works upon the other. c-u.lt::-u.re Cha..n.ge A th ird concept necessary for grasping Bowers' perspective is that _ .. of culture change. Cu l tures change through natural and human initiated events. A fam i ne or drought or earthquake can have catastrophic impact on a culture. Likewise , a symbo 1; c i nterpretati on of these events can be a major factor in change. The gods may have deserted us because our dwelling- place is full of ev il, hence the famine or earthquake. Wars, economic depres -sions, and political repressions may lead to other kinds of cultural change . For examp l e, in Western European thought the artist ' s unique vision is highly valued, whereas in contemporary China it ;s the art -ist's ability to visualize the glory of the state that is valued. Change may also come about more positively by a good harvest, a new coral reef that forms a harbor, or the budget-ing of state monies to support the arts. Some cultures are more respons i ve to change and adapt to new conditions whereas others may disintegrate and disappear as on-going features of human life. In the context of Bowers' perspective, the focus here is on cu 1 ture change tak i ng place through the informed participation of citizens. If a catastrophe happens, the Soviets outstrip us technologi-cally in the space race, or art teachers and art programs are eliminated from the schools, how wi 11 these events be interpreted , who has the power to interpret and understand them, and how will all of this impact upon us as a society and as individuals? Will special interest groups such as the Council for Policy Studies in Art Educat ion (membership by invitation only) or the Ro ckefeller Foundation def i ne these events for us and prescribe our course of acti on? Wi 11 each of us take respons ibi' ity for acting upon these events and negotiating t hem into the course .of our collec -tive lives? Is the responsibi lity for culture change to be the pro-vince of others who are experts and 85 know what t o do or can a CltlZen take the power to significantly act upon these phenomena, too? Irnplic:a..tic::>r:l.!S f c> r E d .. u. c:: a.. t. .i c> r:l. Bowers advocates a popul ace empowered through education for negotiating cultural change and changes 1n our basic be l ief system. Bowers ' concern about this problem is triggered by the i mpact of rapid technolog i ca l change and moderniza-tion upon twentieth century cul -tures. Life in the twentieth century United States has been characterized by an accel erat ion of change - exemplified by the rapid appearance and disappearance of styl es and "isms" in the visual arts - that has l eft littl e time t o adequate 1 y reso 1 ve o r negot i ate events that require consi dered thought and act ion by citi zens of a democracy before the onset of others. The rapid change has resulted in the tearing of the cultural canopy covering our indivi-dua 1 1 i ves. Before we have adequa-tely "digested" the images of Abstract Expression, Color Fi e ld Painting, or Ninimal ism, we ar ·~ exposed to the images of New Rea l -ism. What i s important ; s t he nature of the patches that we put on the cu1 tura1 canopy and whether or not we can patch faster than the appearance of the holes. For example, is realism to be in or out? Is imagery to express the art ist's mood or to show reality from an analytical perspect ive? Or, maybe, both? Issues requiring attention in t he culture at large , may be t he fo l lowing: Is the concept of progress a viabl e one in light of limited physical resources? Is ac id rain controllable or must the need to work in factories diminish our enjoyment of natural forests and preserves? Can we solve all our problems through the author ity c l aims of Cartesian style rational t hinking, the scientific method, and technical know- how? Can citizens fee 1 empowered to act back on these issues and find ways to do so? In art education, we might examine the following issues : In the el i ti st- popul ist controversy, what wou l d be the impact of losing the elitist t raditions? Wou l d eliminating looking at and thinking about art commis s ioned by the Church, royalty, a nd work endorsed by New York gall eri es and museums contribut e to a better understanding of art in our 1 ives? Does a popu-list viewpoin t that focuses on popu l ar imagery in the media en -dorsed by business and marketing interests, as we 11 as fo 1 k a r t and art made by untutored persons, serve as an adequate basis for understand -1ng our relationship to visual images? What do each of these perspectives contribute to our understanding of art that is impor -tan~ and, why is it important? Is Marxist aesthe tic theory l iberating, and insightfu l or is it grounded in taken- for - granted assumptions about art that were usefu l in the nine-teenth century and are, perhaps , not so usefu l in the l ate twentieth century? Can DBAE adequately address the prob l em of whether an understand i ng of the formal struc-tures of each discipl i ne of artis t ic know l edge provi de empowerment to negotiate art - based cultural tradi -tions and community patterns? Cc>rrun~r:lic a.t. i"V"e CC>ITlpe t.e:r:lce In view of the issues of rapid social change , the prevalence of only technological or technical solutions to our pr oblems, and the alteration of basic cultural be -liefs, Bowers proposes the formula -tion of a new theory of education . He states that the primary and appropriate goal of American educa -tion is communica t ive compe tence. By this, Bowers mea ns an : individual's ability to negotiate meanings and pur-poses instea d of passively accepting the social rea l ities 86 def i n ~d by t h· Th . 0 ers. . .. e unlq~e contri but i ons t hat pub 11 c educa t i on can make t o the student's commun i cative competence in cl ude: (1) providing an understanding of the cu l tura l forces th at foster change; ( 2) providing knowl edg e of cu l tural tradi -tions that wi ll enab l e stu-dents to exercise a judgment a bout those e l ements of the cu l ture that are worth preser -ving; and ( 3 ) provi d i ng a method of t hinking t hat enables students to see decisions i n socia l l ife i n terms of relationships , continuities, discon j unctions, and trade- offs (1984 , p.2). In sum, students need to be communicatively competent and culturally li terate . The y need to be ab l e "to read or decode the taken-for- granted assumpti ons and conceptua l categories that under l ie the indivi dual ' s wor l d of experi -ence" (1984 , p.2 ) . The means by wh i ch communica t ive competence i s to be brought about is the curricu l um . The c urricu l um i s a major force in the transmiss i on of cultu r a l messages and t he enc ul t ura -tion or socia li zat i on of students. Bowers has proposed that t hree princip l es to be considered for the deve l opment of a curricu l um whi c h wi ll ach i eve some distance from t he students' taken - for - granted concep -tions acquired during social i zat i on and provide some psychologica l ly safe place for examining them. First Principle: Utili z ing Stu-dents ' Phenomenologi cal Culture Bowers states that a first step in e xamining cultural patterns is to study the students ' own persona l or phenomeno 1 ogi ca 1 experi ence . One approach would be to keep a diary of on e ' s encounters wi th the theme or topic to be studied such as the role of artist, art historian, or art critic . Another is to interview persons who have had experience with the top; c and fi nd out what thei r personal phenomenological experience has been and comparing it with one's own. Second Principle: Use of Historical Perspective to De-objectify Know-ledge A next step in the examination of cultural patterns is to study the social origins of a topic and find out how the topic began and has been transformed over time. One might engage in some 1 ibrary research or cross-generational inquiry. For example, how do one's grandparents, parents, and siblings view the concept of work or art? Third Principle: Incorporating A Cross-Cultural Perspective A third step in examlnlng cultural knowledge is to study how other cultures define and interpret the topic at hand . How do Native Americans and the Amish view the concept of work and art? Do the Chinese or the Nigerians view these concepts in the same way as Ameri -cans? Investigations along these lines problemize a person's internalized cultural categories, thus throwing them into relief. At that point, t he cultural and social knowledge one has acquired can be recognized, talked about, and consciously negotiated in terms of finding where it might be dysfunctional, and deciding to continue to carry this knowledge as is, to forget it, or to alter it through active social intervention in some way. An important figure in the transmission of cultural and social knowledge via the curriculum i s the teacher. To implement Bowers ' proposal, teachers as gatekeepers or knowledge brokers, who control both the frameworks and the content one learns about social knowledge, will need to become familiar with the soc i 01 ogy of knowl edge themse 1 ves . They will need to exercise communi-cative competence in terms ot sensitivity to the preservation of 87 meaningful traditions and patterns , the embeddedness of concepts internalized during their own socialization, and the ability to illuminate taken-far-granted beliefs and pr<l.ctices. Cc:>rnrnl...l..r:t.ic::a..t.i~e Cc:>rnpetenc::e a..rl.d AI't Edl...l..c::a..tic>rl. The visual arts can contribute to t he students' communicative competence . Cultural traditions and forces can be exam i ned through art forms using Bowers' three princi-ples . The social realit ies created by human beings and aspects of them are visible in the images found in art works. Art works are part of the material cu lture of a society and ren ect the interests and thinking of their makers as culture carriers and cultural participants . Comparing and contrasting the imagery, style , and media of the visual arts found ln students' phenomenological experience, in history, and in other cultures is an excel l ent way to il l uminate our assumpt ions and conceptua l catego -ries. Bowers' proposal a l so ha~ implications for teaching about art. For example, at the elementary level, children could investigate their conceptions of art and art -ists. They could ask parents about their concepts. Artists cou l d be invited to class to share their views on what they do. Information about how images are made in other societies, and for what purposes, might be gathered through some library work or lookin g a t and discussing actua l images. Through discussion, the cultural categories referring to artists and their work would be illuminated and open to discussion. Points to ponder might be: What do artists do? Why do they make art? What ki nds of art and images do they make? What stereotypes exist about artists? Is making art easy and can anyone claim to be an artist? At the secondary l evel, students cou ld investigate how art funct i ons in · their l ives and the soc i ety at large. Phenomenol ogical, histori-cal, and cross-cultural invest iga-t ions that examine how art functions in society would al l yi eld po in ts for discussion and further inquiry . The r i chness of art history, art criticism, art theori es, and the development of art forms and med ia could become both the topics of inquiry and the sources for know-ledge. Points to ponder could become more complex. Students might consider why rational or scientific knowledge is valued more highly than the kinds of knowledge that artists use in making i mages and a l s "h kno~ledge found ;n the imagesO U';a~ artlsts make. They might "inou ,' . t h t" re aoo u w y cer a l n lmagery is valued and others are not at a given t im'" or over t ;me. a nd eXam; ne th; implications of a relativistic point of view wh ich ho l ds that art i s anything you want it to be. Using Bowers' proposa l , art teachers and their students would be able to examine in a thorough manner, the foundational concepts underlying theory and practice in the visual arts . One might even tackle the concept that one should not talk about art but just look at it! Refe:.re:rl.ces Barrett, R. (1984). Culture and conduct. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Pub li shing Co. Bea l s, A. (1979) . Cultur e in process (3rd ed.). New York : Hol t Ri nehart & Winston. Berger, P. & Luckmann, T. (1966). The socia l construction of rea li ty. Garden City, NJ: Doubleday. Bowers, C. ( 1974 ) . Cultural literacy for freedom. Eugene, OR : Elan. Bowers, C. (1984). The promise of theory. New Yo r k: Longman. Bowers, C. ( 1987 ) . Elements of a post- liberal theory of education. New Yo rk: Teachers Col lege Press. Schutz, A. (197D) . On phenomenology and soc ial relations. (H . Wagner, Ed.). Ch i cago: Unive rs ity of Chicago Press. Nancy R. Jo hnson is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Art at Louisiana State University , Baton Rouge. 88 

Culture Change: The Work of C.A. Bowers in Educational Policy

https://scholarscompass.vcu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1088&amp;context=jstae

Culture Change: The Work of C.A. Bowers in Educational Policy

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

VCU Scholars Compass