The Place of Visual
Arts in Education
Liz Ashworth,
Faculty of Education,
Nipissing University
Why bother learning about visual
arts’ place in education?
• There is a strong “back-to-basics”
movement in politics and school boards
everywhere
• Rarely do non-artists take art seriously
• Money is usually cut from arts programs
first
• Someday, you may have to protect your
program from extinction
• Knowing the history is power for you
Art Education in Ontario
• Pre-public education, apprenticeships were
common
• Artistically-talented often waited until
adulthood to take formal art courses
(usually for rich only)
• In 1840s, public education introduced in
Ontario by Egerton Ryerson
• Art included in technical training only
Art Education in Ontario, cont’d…
• Ryerson divided curriculum into three
subject areas: “Cardinal”, “Required”, and
“Other”
• Only boys studied “Cardinal” subjects
(Greek and Roman culture)
• All students studied “Required” subjects
(Math, Philosophy, History, Geography,
English)
Art Education in Ontario, cont’d…
• “Other” subjects (boys) - Bookkeeping,
Commercial Math, Technical Drawing
• “Other” subjects (girls) - Music, Dancing,
French, Fancy Needlework, Drawing,
Painting
• This model lasted for a decade, until it was
replaced by Britain’s South Kensington
Model of Education
Art Education in Ontario, cont’d…
• 1850s – government created the
Department of Science and Art
• Formed to aid and control art schools and
exams, supervise and train art teachers
• Main goals – sharpen industrial design
skills, provide instruction in decorative
arts, train drawing teachers for private
and public schools
• This model continued until after WW2
Art Education in Ontario, cont’d…
• Post WW2 – technical and academic
schools merged to form secondary schools
• 1970s – more academic approach to
teaching art; schools of the arts formed
• Art curriculum left mostly to individual
teachers and based on their areas of
expertise
• Much pressure from post-secondary
institutions to streamline art curriculum
Art Education in Ontario, cont’d…
• 1986 – OSIS art education document
introduced
• Very prescriptive (strict percentages of
time for design, studio, art history,
criticism)
• OAC course worked out to 50% studio and
50% art history; with inclusion of final
exam, course content was 70% knowledge
about art but only 30% knowledge of
creating art
Art Education in Ontario, cont’d…
• 1990s – art programs threatened by “backto-basics” movement
• Money cut, art viewed as a non-essential
“frill”
• Some schools cut out one or more level of
instruction (Basic, General, Advanced) or cut
out art entirely
• 1997 – government looked at replacing art
teachers with non-certified instructors
Art Education in Ontario, cont’d…
• 2000 – OSS documents introduced
• Art instruction levels changed to Open and
University/College entrance
• Expectations more vague than 1986
document; used strands (theory, creation,
analysis) and no percentages
• Provided for mandatory cumulative art
curriculum from K-12
Art Education in Ontario, cont’d…
• Visual arts programs now threatened by new
rigorous graduation requirements and demise
of OAC (less room for “optional” subjects in
timetable)
• Students need only one arts credit to
graduate; could be art, music, drama, or dance
• New bridges between art and technology
• Design education and creative problem-solving
skills across the curriculum
What Can You Do?
• Market your program well to intermediate
students
• Become an art education activist among
staff, community, government
• Become aware of proposed Ministry of
Education changes to art education policies
• Be prepared for at least one major art
curriculum change in your career (usually
change every 15 years)
References
Clark, R. (1994). Art Education: A Canadian
Perspective. Toronto: OSEA.
Gidney, R.D. (1999). From Hope to Harris:
the reshaping of Ontario’s schools.
Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
Gidney, R.D. (1990). Inventing Secondary
Education: the rise of the high school in
nineteenth-century Ontario. Kingston, ON:
McGill-Queen’s University Press.