Although the ideas presented by Trimis and Savva are extremely detailed and precise, I believe them to be true. Students, especially early learners do obtain knowledge through interaction; therefore learning is always a continuous process. I also agree with the idea that children discover more about themselves once they learn more about their own environment whether it is through an in-depth exploration of materials or a lecture, however a hands on experience is more effective and is the point Trimis and Savva are trying to make.
Even though I agree with Savva and Trimis, I do not understand why the aesthetic sensitivity of a persons ability to relate to a cultural environment is based on the idea of producing and perceiving art, if the main idea and goal of this project is to experience the materials encountered in a variety of environments. Unless this is only a point that Trimis is trying to make and Savva are not the main idea of the article but instead the thesis is that it is a teachers job to cultivate learning through the practice of discovery, regarding teachers, students, location and materials.
Sara,
ReplyDeleteI see how it could get confusing, taking the idea of how one experiences their environment and directly relating that to art making, but I think that the two can really go hand in hand. Art is actually a visual point of view or perception, layed out for other people to see. As artists, we end up expressing things about ourselves and how we experience the world, even if we don't do it intentionally. So, I think for these young children, it's important to see things, feel things, and find out how they react to things, as a jumping off point into creating their own unique perceptions. It's the experience of life that will influence their art making.