Listening with your eyes: Multimodal approaches to art appreciation in primary school

Main Article Content

Ruth Breeze

Abstract

Author/s


Ruth Breeze
Instituto Cultura y Sociedad, Universidad de Navarra, Spain


 


ABSTRACT


Fine arts offer opportunities for multimodal approaches in education. Museums and galleries are now aware of their social role, and provide outreach activities designed to bring an understanding of art to a wider public. Their websites offer educational material for school children, showing how artistic knowledge and sensitivity can be cultivated with young age groups. However, little attention has been paid to such didactic material by discourse analysts interested in multimodality. This paper builds on Swales’s (2016) article on the genre of the single image account (SIA), which centres on texts about famous paintings written by experts for a general readership. Here, I focus on SIAs for didactic purposes, examining pedagogical resources on the National Gallery’s website. Accessible SIAs are combined with suggestions to enhance primary school pupils’ learning through creative activities across a variety of modes. Guidelines are provided for writing SIAs for educational purposes in other contexts.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Article Details

How to Cite
Breeze, R. (2018). Listening with your eyes: Multimodal approaches to art appreciation in primary school. Language Value, 10(1). https://doi.org/10.6035/LanguageV.2018.10.4
Section
Articles

References

Arbués, E. and Naval, C. 2014. “Museums as educational social spaces”. Estudios sobre Educación, 27, 133-151.

Bateman, J. 2014. Text and image. A critical introduction to the visual/verbal divide. London: Routledge.

Baxendall, M. 1979. “The language of art history”. New Literary History, 10, 453-465.

Bhatia, V. K. 2004. Worlds of written discourse. London: Continuum.

Breeze, R. and García Laborda, J. 2016. “Issues in teacher education for bilingual schools”. Estudios sobre Educación, 31, 9-12.

Brooklyn Museum. 2018. Hands on art. 19 March 2018. https://www.brooklynmuseum.org/education/youth-and-families/hands_on_art

Fontal Merillas, O. 2009. “Los museos de arte: un campo emergente de investigación e innovación para la enseñanza del arte”. Revista Electrónica Interuniversitaria para la Formación del Profesorado, 12 (4), 75-88.

Geertz, C. 1980. Negara. The theater state in nineteenth-century Bali. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Harris, B. and Zucker, S. 2016. “Making the absent present: the imperative of teaching art history”. Art History Pedagogy and Practice, 1 (1). 19 March 2018. http://academicworks.cuny.edu/ahpp/vol1/iss1/4

Martikainen, J. 2017. “Making pictures as a method of teaching art history”. International Journal of Education and the Arts, 18 (19). 19 March 2018. http://www.ijea.org/v18n19/v18n19.pdf

National Gallery. 2018. Take one picture. 19 March 2018. https://www.nationalgallery.org.uk/learning/teachers-and-schools/take-one-picture

Nicolajeva, M. and Scott, C. 2001. How picturebooks work. London: Routledge.

Salisbury, M. and Styles, M. 2012. Children’s picturebooks: the art of visual storytelling. London: Lawrence King.

Sears, E. 2002. “‘Reading’ images”. In Sears, E. and T. K. Thomas (Eds.) Reading medieval images. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1-17.

Swales, J. 1990. Genre analysis. English in academic and research settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Swales, J. 2016. “Configuring image and context: writing ‘about’ pictures”. English for Specific Purposes, 41, 22-35.

Swales, J. and Feak, C. 2013. Academic writing for graduate students. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

Tishman, S., McKinney, A. and Straughn, C. 2007. Study center learning: An investigation of the educational power and potential of the Harvard University Art Museums Study Center. Boston MA: Harvard Project Zero.

Unsworth, L. 2006. “Towards a metalanguage for multiliteracies education: describing the meaning-making resources of language-image interaction”. English Teaching Practice and Critique, 5 (1), 55-76.