33차 해외전문가 초청 워크숍 자료집

목 차 Part 0. 강사소개 5

Part 1. 호주 멜버른 복합문화예술공간 아트플레이(Behind ArtPlay's Bright Orange Door) 9

Part 2. 키즈 오운 퍼블리싱(Kids' Own Publishing) 61 - 키즈 오운 퍼블리싱 소개 63 - 어린이 커뮤니티 퍼블리싱(Childrens Community Publishing)에 대하여 64

Contents Part 0. Introducing the Instructors 67

Part 1. Behind ArtPlay's Bright Orange Door 71

Part 2. Kids' Own Publishing 123 - Introduction 125 - Childrens Community Publishing FAQs 126

호주 멜버른

복합문화예술공간

아트플레이

Part 0.

강사소개

Part 1.

호주 멜버른 복합문화예술공간 아트플레이

12

예술가와 함께 하는 아트플레이 워크숍을 통한 아동 참여ㆍ학습ㆍ문화 시민권의 조망 및 확장

아트플레이(ArtPlay)는 아일랜드 더블린의 아동예술센터인 더 아크(The Ark)로부터 영감을 얻어 설립된 오스트리아의 아동을 위한 독창적인 예술교육

공간이다. 아트플레이는 아동 예술 및 놀이를 위한 공간이며 아동친화적 도시인 멜버른의 예술적이고 창의적인 문화발전에 기여하는 학교 밖 프로젝트이다.

3세-13세 아동이면 누구나 참여할 수 있으며, 다양한 예술 형태와 연령대를 망라한 예술가들이 주도하는 여러 프로그램을 제공한다. 아트플레이는 2004년

설립됨으로써 아동과 가족을 위한 예술 및 문화 체험 증진을 향한 멜버른의 확고한 의지를 보여주었다. 이 보고서는 2007-2012년에 수행된 연구의 결과이며,

아동 691명

부모 300명

예술가 63명

아트플레이 직원 20명

멜버른 시 직원 4명

연구자 8명의 도움으로,

39건의 워크숍 및

366건의 여론조사를 바탕으로 마련되었다.

자리를 잡고 앉았을 때 분위기는 매우 미묘했습니다. 처음에는 여기서 무엇을 하려고

하는지 의아했습니다. 우리 아이는 가만히 앉아있지 않는 아이여서 과연 참여를 할까

걱정이 되었습니다. 한 10분이나 15분이 지났을까? 마술 같은 일이 일어났습니다. 모든

아이들이 참여를 했고 예술가들은 아이들에게 무엇을 언제 보여줄지 아는 것 같았습니다.

모든 것이 너무도 완벽했습니다. 예술가들은 아이들의 참여를 이끌어냈고 지시하지 않고도,

무언가를 나누어주지도 않고도 아이들의 흥미를 이끌어냈습니다. 그들은 그저 아이들이

원한다고 느낄 때 아이들이 스스로 참여하는 데 필요한 것들만을 제시하였습니다.

– 아트플레이 참여 부모

13

– 시간, 환경/공간, 예술가와 참여자를 독창적으로 결합해낸다.

– 직원들이 아이들을 따뜻하게 맞아주며 지원을 아끼지 않는다.

– 아이들의 창조적 표현을 위한 안전하고, 미적이며, 실질적인 공간을 제공한다.

– 아이들의 창조성 지원을 조직적 목표와 가치로 추구한다.

아트플레이에서는(AT ARTPLAY)– 아이들, 가족, 예술가들이 함께 협동한다.

– 예술가의 성찰 및 평가를 위한 별도의 시간이 할당되어 있다.

– 정기적으로 예술가의 전문적 개발이 수행된다.

– 예술가의 역량을 확대할 기회가 주어진다.

아트플레이에서 아이들은

– 만들기와 직접 ‘해보기’를 통해 즐긴다.

– 인지활동을 강화해주는 도구와 재료를 사용할 수 있다는 것을 높이 평가한다.

– 스스로 예술작품을 만들어갈 자신감을 키운다.

– ‘자신만의 새로운 무언가’를 만들도록 지원을 받는다.

– 창의적이고 협동적인 학습 과정에 참여한다.

– 문화 시민권을 발달시킨다.

– 다른 아이들과 관계를 형성한다.

– 개인적 예술 작업을 통해 배운다.

– 새로운 것을 배우게 된다.

– 예술적 기술과 지식을 배운다.

– 개인적 경험을 쌓고 이를 공유한다.

– 개인적으로 위험을 감수하는 법을 배우며, 협력, 의사소통 기술 및 자기

효능감(self-efficacy)을 발달시킨다.

– 점진적이면서도 서두르지 않는 다양한 분야와의 연결고리가 많은 활동에 참여한다.

– 맞춤 환경에서 활동에 참여한다.

아트플레이는(ARTPLAY HAS)아트플레이에서 아이들과 부모들은

– 실제적인 예술 워크숍에 참여한다.

아트플레이에서 부모들은

– 아이들에게 학교 밖 예술 체험을 제공하고자 한다.

– 공개적이고 재미있고 창의적인 체험을 제공하고자 한다.

– 예술 체험을 중시한다.

– 따뜻하고 지지적인 환경을 중시한다.

– 향후 가족을 위한 예술활동의 아이디어로 활용한다.

– 아이들과 놀이를 통해 함께 보내는 시간을 중시한다.

– 아이들과 함께 창작하는 기회를 중시한다.

– 아이들이 공공 공간에서 어떻게 상호작용하고 반응하는지 본다.

아트플레이에서 예술가들은

– 자신의 예술적 활동과 창조적 과정을 아이들에게 모델로 제공한다.

– 아이들의 관심사와 정서적 요구에 부응하는 공개 워크숍을 만든다.

– 복합 모델을 통한 의사소통에 능숙하다.

– 함께 작업한다.

– 조력자, 모델, 디렉터, 참여 모니터 등 다양한 역할을 수행한다.

– 개인적, 전문적 교류를 통해 아이들의 참여를 유도한다.

– 분야를 망라하는 작업을 한다.

– 아이들의 자기 효능감, 의사소통, 협력, 문제해결, 위험감수 등 ‘배움을 위한

학습(learning to learn)’ 능력을 발달시키도록 돕는다.

– 아이들 주도 활동이 되도록 부모를 지도한다.

아이들과 예술가는

– 공동놀이 및 공동창작을 통해 관계를 형성한다.

15

아트플레이(ArtPlay)란?

멜버른의 도시개발 과정에서 철거가 예정된 건물이 있던 멜버른 중앙 조차장

(操車場)이 현재의 활기찬 지역사회 및 문화 지구로 탈바꿈하였다. 도시계획

담당자, 지방정부 의원, 문화 및 예술 지도자들이 뜻을 모아 이곳을 아동 및

가족을 위한 공간 그리고 예술을 통해 함께 창작 할 수 있는 공간으로 전환

하자는 아이디어를 모았고 이를 기반으로 아트플레이가 탄생되었다.

외견상으로는 새로운 공공 공간인 연방 광장(Federation Square)의 일부인

아트플레이는, 멜버른 중심부 강변 지역 노른자 부지에 공원을 개발할 기회를

살려 설립되었다. 당시 도시계획 담당자들은 도시의 삶이 변화하고 있다는

것을 간파하고 있었고, 이를 Rob Adams1 는 다음과 같이 표현했다.

… 80년대부터 멜버른이 직면한 도전과제 중 하나는 핵심 상업지구인 이

도시를 어떻게 핵심 활동 무대로 효과적으로 전환하는 것이었다. 이러한 일이

실제로 일어났다… 지금 일간지 The Age를 보면 오전 8시에서 오후 5시

까지만의 도시에서 많은 시간을 보내며 살고 있는 장소가 된 도시에 대해,

단기간에 800 가구에서 16,000가구로 늘어난 도시에 대해 얘기한다.

이러한 도시 변혁의 추동력은 아동 및 가족 인구의 증가였다. 모리스 벨아미2 는

도시계획 담당자들로 하여금 “아동친화적 도시라는 개념을 최초로 진지하게

고려”하게 할 “새로운 전략을 찾고 있었다”며, 강변 노른자 부지(prime

area)에 공원 및 지역사회 예술 공간의 개발은 “우연”이 아니라 “쇼핑과

구매와는 다른 경험을 제공하는, 아동과 가족을 위한 보다 심층적인 노력의

일환이었다”라고 덧붙였다.

폐허가 된 건물을 지역사회 예술 공간으로 만드는 아이디어가 제시되었다.

이 아이디어를 지지한 두 의원 롭 아담스와 윌슨 의원은 어렸을 적 학교

교육을 통한 예술 활동에 제약을 느꼈고, 아이들은 “그들의 아이디어를

표현하고” “창의성을 발휘할” 기회를 보다 많이 가질 수 있어야 한다고

믿었다.

1. 건축가이자 도시설계자로서, 멜버른 도시계획국장이다. 2. 전(前) 멜버른 예술문화부국장

16

아트플레이로 발전할 아이디어의 씨앗은 이미 심어졌지만, 이 아이디어는

롭 아담스가 아일랜드 더블린의 독창적 아동예술센터인 더 아크(The Ark)를

직접 둘러본 후에야 비로소 공식적으로 검토되기 시작했고 이로부터 아트

플레이의 개념이 구체화되었다. “더 아크를 통해서 내가 공감할 수 있는

아이디어를 발견했다…. 아이들이 전문 예술가들과 그들을 위한 공간에서

함께 작업을 하는 것이었다.” 더 아크 미션의 핵심은 유엔 아동권리에 관한

협약(the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child) 제31조에

따라 도출된 ‘시민으로서의 아이들’의 이미지이다. 동 협약 13조는 “문화

및 예술적 삶에 참여할 아동의 권리를 존중하고 촉진하며 문화, 예술, 오락

및 레저활동에 참여할 적절하고 동등한 기회의 제공을 독려”할 필요성을

강조한다 (United Nations, 1989: 9). 이는 아동과 가족의 사회적 참여를

증진하려는 멜버른의 노력과 일치했다.

도시계획 담당자들은 이로써 아트플레이의 비전과 실천모델을 모두 얻게

되었다. 또한 더 아크의 핵심 예술가였던 사이먼 스페인을 아트플레이의

창작 프로듀서(Creative Producer)로 영입할 수 있었다. 롭 아담스같은 아트

플레이의 핵심인물들은 예술 행정가보다는 아이들과 작업한 경험이 있는

예술가를 고용하는 것을 선호하였다.

예술가들의 창의적 관리기술과 이들의 작업에 들인 노력이 제대로 평가되지

않았습니다…. 거의 모든 프로젝트에 예술가들이 (도시 계획자로서) 참여

합니다. 이는 일부에게는 위협이 되기도 하나 ‘기존 사고에서 벗어나기’를

원하는 사람들에게는 신나는 일입니다.

모리스 벨아미가 강조했듯 복잡하지만 시의 적절한 이벤트들이 맞물려

전개되면서, “멜버른이 어떻게 아동친화적 도시 아이디어를 구체화할 수

있었는지, 동시에 아이들에게 다른 차원에서, 심도 있는 무언가를 제공하는

놀라운 예”가 될 것이라는 신념이 생기게 되었고, 이는 아트플레이 탄생의

촉매제가 되었다.

아트플레이의 지지자들은 아트플레이는 창작 프로듀서의 지도 아래 자체적

으로 형태를 찾아가고 3-13세 아이들을 위한 참여 예술 프로그램을 만들어

갈 능력이 있음을 믿었다. 여러 비즈니스 플랜을 반복 검토한 후에, 위원회는

마이어 재단(Myer Foundation)의 후원을 기반으로 3년간 아트플레이에

재정지원을 하기로 합의했다. 자체적으로 성공할 모든 기회를 제공하는 ‘독립적(arms-length)’ 방식으로 발전해야 할 필요성에도 합의했다. 실험을 할

자유가 주어지자 프로그램 구성이 시작되고 발전되었으며, 기존 축제와

상주 예술가 프로젝트 협력이 이뤄졌다. 이렇게 2012년 아트플레이는 위원

회의 핵심 사업이 되었다.

기관 설명(The Organization)

아트플레이 직원들은 아이들과 가족들을 작은 현관에서 큰 창문과 열린

아치형 지붕 아래 위치한 넓고 개방된 깔끔한 홀로 인도한다. 아트플레이

직원과의 이러한 첫 교류는 참가자의 신뢰를 형성하게 되고 서먹함을 해소

한다. 단시간에 대부분의 참가자는 아트플레이 밖 생활은 잊고 아트플레이

안에서의 활동에 집중하게 된다.

창작 프로듀서 사이먼 스페인은 예술가로서 예술가 주도 프로그램에 대한

자신만의 분명한 비전을 갖고 있었다. 참가자들은 현관에서부터 환영을

받는다는 느낌을 받았고, 아트플레이 직원들은 워크숍 시작 전과 진행과정

뿐만 아니라 사후에도 참가자들과 상호작용을 하였고, 부모들이 자신의

창작 역량에 자신감을 갖도록 도움을 주었다. 이러한 지원은 여러 면에서

예술가의 창조적 역할을 보완해 주었다. 아트플레이 프로그램 코디네이터

알렉스는 직원들은 ‘통로’ 역할을 했고 참가자들이 워크숍 내용을 ‘이해’할

수 있도록 도왔다고 했다. 바비3 에 따르면 직원들은 또한 ‘진행자’의 역할도

하고 예술가와 아이들 사이에서, 특히 예술가가 아이들과 작업한 경험이 없는

경우 ‘중재자’ 역할을 하였다. 이러한 역할을 위해 특별한 교육을 받지는

않지만 직원들 대부분은 아이들과 작업한 경험이 있었다. 바비는 “사실,

직원들은 (교육을 받진 않았지만) 모두 인내, 아이들에 대한 사랑, 그리고

예술에 대한 애정이라는 특별한 자질을 가지고 있다”고 했다.

3. 관객 담당 코디네이터

17

공간으로 쓰인다. 건물의 네 면은 높은 창이 있어 자연채광이 된다. 개방된

모듈 공간으로 설계되어 연령대와 프로그램에 따라 언제든지 맞춤형 설계가

가능하여 활동에 집중할 수 있는 환경과 집과 같은 안락함을 제공한다.

이처럼 자유자재로 변형할 수 있는 공간이기에 아트플레이는 참가자들에게 ‘신선함’을 지속적으로 제공한다.

아트플레이의 물리적 공간은 무용, 음악 공연 및 대규모 시각예술 등 다양한

예술 활동에 적합한 개방형 1층 홀로 구성되어 있다. 홀 옆에는 완전히

폐쇄하여 어둡게 만들 수 있는 작은 공간이 있다. 이 작은 공간은 세미나실

이나 갤러리 또는 예술작품 작업을 위한 보다 친밀한 공간으로 전환이 가능

하다. 홀 위 중간층 공간은 보다 절제된 예술 체험에 적합한 소규모 워크숍

공간(The Space)

18

아이들 각자의 음악 만들기가 한창일 때 니코는 모든 아이들에게 앵클렁을 제공하는 등 악기를 더 제공했습니다. 순간 주변이 더 자유로워졌고 아이들은 악기

를 가지고 돌아다녔습니다. 아이들과 어른들은 함께 연주를 하고 니코는 아이들 한 명 한 명에게 악기를 어떻게 연주하는지 가르쳐주었습니다. 한 부모는 예

술가들은 “따듯하고, 적극적이고 부드럽고 우호적이었다. 모든 아이들에게 참여 기회를 주었다”고 말했습니다. 한 엄마가 아이를 무릎에 앉히고 트라이앵글

을 연주할 때 마틴은 내내 뒤에서 베이스 연주를 해주었습니다.

워크숍은 대부분 일회성이거나 단기간 진행되며 다양한 연령대에 맞추어 구성된다. 미취학 아동 프로그램은 3-5세 아이들을 위해 45분에서 1시간 동안 진

행되며 20명의 아이들과 부모 혹은 보호자로 구성된다. 6-13세 아이들을 위한 프로그램은 일반적으로 일회성이며 보통 2-3시간 진행되나 일부 하루 종일 진

행되는 경우도 있다. 한 그룹에 참여하는 아이들의 숫자는 5-25명이며, 아이의 연령이 8세 미만인 경우 부모나 보호자가 참석해야 하지만 일반적으로 어른

들의 참석을 요구하지 않는다. 교사가 참가하는 학교 프로그램은 25명의 어린이까지 참가가 가능하며 2-3일 동안 하루 종일 진행되는 워크숍으로 구성된다.

장기 프로그램으로는 (8-13세) 어린이 그룹을 위한 (4-8개 세션으로 구성된) 다양한 종일 워크숍이 있다. 현재 음악과 시각 연극/인형극에만 장기 프로그램

이 존재한다.

워크숍은 시간의 제약 없이 자유롭고 편안한 형식으로 진행된다. 또한 다양한 방식으로 종결을 짓는데, 프레젠테이션/공연 또는 최종 평가회를 개최하거나

때로는 아이들이 개별적으로 자신의 작업을 마무리하면서 조용히 끝나기도 한다. 중요한 것은 아트플레이에서는 시간과 공간의 제약이 없다는 것이다. 프로

그램이 시작되면 아이들, 예술가 그리고 가족들은 각자의 작업에 집중한다.

프로그램 (The Program)

19

사회배려자 그룹이나 개인에게 교통비와 워크숍 비용을 조달할 수 있었다.

특히 이러한 보조금은 아트플레이 학교 프로그램을 멜버른 중심지 학교의 아

이들에서 도시로 나오지 않는 변두리 및 지방 학교의 아이들에게까지 확대할

수 있었다.

아트플레이는 지속적으로 다양한 파트너십을 통해 재원을 조달했고 이를 통

해 역량과 참여 범위를 확대할 수 있었다. 2012년에는 50일간의 무료 또는

낮은 비용으로 운영이 가능한 학교 워크숍을 포함한 450건의 이벤트, 프로

그램 및 워크숍이 진행되었다.

연구 파트너십 (The Research Partnership)

아트플레이는 예술ㆍ발달ㆍ문화적 요소를 독창적으로 결합함으로써 아동,

부모, 교사들이 예술가들과 직접 교류하게 하고 학교 밖 환경에서 예술작업

을 할 수 있게 했다. 또한 아트플레이는 다른 데에서는 제공하지 못하는 연구

기회도 제공했다. 아트플레이는 연구에 ‘풍족한 공간’을 제공하는 장소로서

증명된 개방적이고 수용적인 환경이다(Davis, 2008).

아트플레이 시설이 개방된 직후, 아트플레이 현상을 연구하기 위해 멜버른

시와 멜버른 대학교(University of Melbourne)의 협력이 시작되었다. 호주연

구위원회와 호주예술위원회의 지원을 받는 이 협력을 통해 4개년 연구 프로

젝트인 “예술가와 함께하는 아트플레이 워크숍을 통한 아동 참여, 학습, 문

화 시민권의 매핑 및 확대(Mapping and augmenting engagement, learning

and cultural citizenship for children through Artplay workshops with

artists)”가 수행되었다. 2007년 7월에 시작된 이 프로젝트 덕분에 3-13세 아

이들을 대상으로 예술 및 놀이 체험을 제공하기 위해 특별히 설계된 공간에

서 지속적인 심층 연구를 진행할 수 있는 기회가 제공되었다. 이러한 연구 협

력 전 과정에서 우리는 아트플레이에 관여하는 모든 이들의 관점을 적극적으

로 수집했고, 평가를 통해 지속적 성찰, 질문 및 교류를 촉진하였다. 이들 통

해 목표 설정 및 프로그램을 확대ㆍ심화시킬 아트플레이 조직의 역량을 강

화할 수 있었다.

처음부터 예술가는 프로그램 제작의 핵심 구성요소로 개념화되었다. 운영

첫 해 이후 정규 예술가 핵심 그룹이 구성되었다. 다수의 워크숍을 이끄는

것 외에, 이들 중 일부는 프로그램을 공동 개발하도록 고용되었다. 이렇게

안정적으로 예술가를 공급하는 것 외에도 다양한 그룹의 예술가들을 일회

적 또는 주기적으로 고용하였다.

부모들은 아이들에게 예술의 혜택을 주어야 한다는 것을 알고 있지만 아이

들에게 예술 체험을 제공할 기회와 자원, 기술 측면에선 갈증을 느끼고 있

었다. 이러한 요구에 부응해 ‘더 아크’와 ‘아트플레이’ 같은 공간이 나타났

다. 바비는 다음과 같이 말했다.

많은 사람들에게 아트플레이는 한번 시도해볼 만한 것입니다. 그러나 이들

을 다시 오게 하는 것은 장소, 건물 자체, 직원에게 받은 느낌이며, 우리가

얼마나 친절하고 따듯한가에 달려 있습니다. 그리고 전문성입니다. 건물,

구조, 그리고 실제 예술가와 함께 작업하는 다양한 것들, 이 모든 것이 만들

어내는 환경입니다….

이 보고서에 요약되어 있는 아트플레이의 전개과정을 보면 아트플레이는 윌

슨의원 같은 핵심 주창자들이 희망했던 것들, 즉 “아이들이 문화에 참여토록

하여 도시, 가족 그리고 서로 상호작용을 하도록” 할 수 있음을 알 수 있다.

아이들의 목소리(Children’s Voices)

아트플레이가 성공적으로 설립된 후, 위원회는 아트플레이에 대한 연간 보

조금을 확대했다($100,000). 아이들에게 투표권을 부여한 보조금 패널이 구

성되었다. 2007년 연구에서 분석한 이러한 패널에는 성인(부모, 보조자 또는

지인)과 짝을 지은 7-10세의 아이들, 예술가, 마이어 재단 대표, 아트플레이

창작 프로듀서가 참여하였다. 하루를 투자하여 패널은 체계적으로 예술가들

의 제출 내용을 검토하고, 각각의 장점을 토론하며, 선호도 순으로 점수를 매

겼다. 이는 의사소통, 정당화, 그리고 후속 신청서의 장점을 고려한 우선순위

설정 및 재설정 등을 요구하는 복잡한 과정이었다.

보조금 프로그램을 통해 아트플레이는 아이들과 함께 작업할 다양한 숙련된

예술가 및 신규 예술가들을 모집할 수 있었다. 초기에는 얼마 안 되는 워크숍

에만 재정지원이 되었지만, 이러한 보조금 덕택으로 아트플레이는 비용 때문

에 할 수 없었던, 또는 충분한 참여를 이끌 수 없는 위험이 있어 시도할 수 없

었던 혁신적인 워크숍도 시도할 수 있었다. 일부 보조금 지원 제안서는 소외

계층의 참여를 목표로 했다. 아트플레이 초창기부터 무료 워크숍과 참가비가

저렴한 워크숍을 시행했다. 그러나 아트플레이는 도시로 나오는 것이 익숙하

지 않거나 교통비 때문에 참여를 꺼려하는 경제적으로 어려운 가정만을 대상

으로 한 것은 아니었다. 한 자산단체가 지원을 하면서 다양한 배경의 아이들

을 적극적으로 참여시킬 기회를 마련하였다. 이 단체로부터 재정지원을 받아

예술가(The Artists)

20

아트플레이 참가자들은 대부분 멜버른 교외에 거주하는 교육 수준이 높은 전문직 가족이다. 모국어로 영어를 사용하는 가족이 주를 이루나 23%는 영어가

아닌 언어를 사용할 만큼 참가자들이 다양하다(그림 2). 무료 대규모 축제의 일환으로 아트플레이 행사에 참가한 사람들은 포함되지 않는다. 또한 학교 프로

그램은 사회배려층과 소외계층 아동에 중점을 두고 있다는 것에 주목해야 한다.

참여 (Engagement)

부모들이 자신의 아이들을 아트플레이에 참가시키는 이유는 다양하다. 아이

들을 ‘새로운’ 경험에 노출시키고 싶은 요구, 창의성 증진과 즐거움을 주려고

하는 경우도 있다(그림 3). 아이들의 관심사를 예술과 연결시키려고 워크숍

에 보내는 경우도 있다. 예술가와 함께 작업할 수 있는 기회를 주는 것은 8세

이상의 학교 프로그램 및 장기 프로그램 참가의 주요한 이유였으나, 연령대

가 낮은 아이들과 함께 온 부모들은 다른 이유를 제시하기도 했다. 프로그램

에 다시 참여하게 한 또 하나의 동기는 아트플레이 직원들의 따듯하고 친절

한 태도였으며, 또한 안전하고 실용적이면서도 미적인 환경이었다.

21

정적인 데이터 외에 아이들이 참여하고 있지 않음을 보여주는 경우도 있었

는데, 이는 대부분 이들의 특수한 신체적, 정서적 요구 때문이었다. 단기간

의 활동에 지장을 주지 않는 아동의 불참여 또는 참여중단은 참여결여(non-

engagement)로 보지 않고 오히려 아동이 성찰하고 재충전할 수 있는 잠재적

인 긍정적 기회로 간주했다.

아이들의 참여가 연구의 주안점이었으나 부모의 높은 참여 수준 또한 파악되

었다. 특히 미취학 아동 부모의 참여도가 높았다. 표적 집단의 부모들은 공동

놀이의 긍정성을 논의했으며, 자녀가 다른 아이들과 어떻게 상호작용했는지

또한 이렇게 같이 나눈 경험이 가정에서의 놀이 및 예술 활동에 자극을 주었

는지를 관찰했다.

설문에 참여한 아동(273명) 중 92%가 워크숍이 재미있었다고 응답했으며,

이들 부모 중 93%(93명)도 같은 응답을 했다. 아이들은 적극적으로 만들어

보고 직접 해보는 것이 재밌었다고 했으며(36%), 도구와 재료를 사용하고 완

성품을 만들 수 있어서 좋았다고 했다. 소수의 아이들(10%), 특히 8세-13세

아이들은 예술가와 함께 작업하고 다른 아이들과 사회적으로 교류하게 된 것

을 가장 기억에 남은 부분으로 꼽았다. 그 외 (8%)는 놀이가 가장 중요한 부

분이었다고 답했다. 아트플레이에서의 체험에 대한 이러한 긍정적 반응은 다

른 관찰 내용과 예술가 인터뷰를 통해서도 확인되었다.

참여 체크리스트(표 1, 32페이지)에 기반한 워크숍 관찰에 따르면, 참가자들

이 고도로 동기부여가 되어있고 지속적으로 참여하고 있음을 알 수 있다. 긍

22

학습 (Learning)

문에 응한 가족 중 97%가 아이들이 아트플레이를 통해, 특히 실제로 예술 작

품 만들어보기와 체험을 통해(78%), 새로운 것을 배웠다고 응답했다(그림

4). 사회적 관계, 창의성, 그리고 자신감 개발을 하게 되었다고 말하는 부모도

있었다. 일부 부모들(13%)은 아이들이 놀이를 하고 즐거워한 것이 가장 큰

수확이라고 답했는데, 이는 아트플레이에 참여하게 된 일반적인 이유 중 하

나와 일치한다. 창의적 과정에 참여하고 놀이를 하는 것은 서로 밀접히 연관

되어 있다. 예술가와 부모 모두가 높이 평가하고 있는 학습에 대한 이러한 접

근법은 워크숍에서 쉽게 관찰되었으며 참여와 밀접하게 연관되어 있었다.

아트플레이에 참여한 아이들과 가족은 참여의 경험을 통해 혜택을 얻거나 배

울 수 있게 된다. 아트플레이에 오기로 선택하는 것은 그 자체로 예술 활동에

대한 관심과 의지를 보여주는 하나의 결정이다. 일단 아트플레이에 오게 되

면 부모는 자신의 아이가 긍정적인 경험을 하는데 온 관심을 쏟는다. 지지적

인 가족 문화는 아이가 아트플레이에서 열린 마음으로 배울 수 있게 한다. 그

러나 이것이 반드시 학습의 결정 요인이 되는 것은 아니다.

조사한 데이터를 보면 아트플레이 프로그램은 아이들에게 예술 속의 예술을

통해 만나는 학습의 기회를 제공함으로써 배우게 한다는 것을 알 수 있다. 설

23

여러 워크숍을 통해 아이들이 자신의 작품을 완성하고 공연을 하면서 학습을

한다는 것이 명백해졌지만, 같은 활동을 가정해서도 시도하겠다고 응답한 부

모들을 보면 학습이 아트플레이에만 국한되지 않는다는 것을 알 수 있다. 이

러한 관점은 부모 표적 집단을 통해서도 확인 된다. 표적 집단의 대다수의 부

모들이 아트플레이의 체험과 (예술 기법, 도구, 과정 등) 학습한 내용은 집에

서도 활용 가능한 자극제가 되었다고 답했다.

실제적인 예술 기법 및 지식 습득은 특정 도구와 기법 및 과정에의 숙련 등

참가아동의 작지만 미묘한 변화를 보면 알 수 있고, 예술가가 사용한 언어와

용어를 받아들이는 것을 보면 알 수 있다. 8-13세 아동이 참여하는 장기워크

숍에서는 프레젠테이션과 퍼포먼스 기술 같은 특정 역량이 개발되는 것을 보

다 쉽게 관찰할 수 있었다.

창의적 사고, 예술 작품 감상능력, 집단 작업 기술 및 문화 감상 능력 향상 등

예술을 통한 학습과 관련된 기타 성과가 발견되었다. 예술 작품 제작이라는

보다 구체적이고 적극적인 요소에 비해 아이들은 이러한 보다 추상적인 학습

영역에는 강조점을 거의 두지 않았다. 반면 예술가들은 아이들에게 학습 과

정을 체험할 기회를 부여한 것을 아트플레이 워크숍의 핵심 성과로 지적했

다. 예술가들은 이러한 기회를 때로는 자신의 예술 활동을 모델로 제시하였

다. 예술가들은 또한 자기효능감, 의사소통, 협력, 문제해결, 위험감수 등 ‘배

움을 위한 학습(learning to learn)’ 능력을 강화하는 것이 중요하다고 생각했

다. 이러한 관점은 활동 전반을 통해 아이들의 참여와 기여에 대한 자신감이

상승한 것을 통해 증명되었다. 아이들의 자신감 상승은 단기적인 일회성 워

크숍에서도 나타났다.

부모들은 또한 창의성(12%)과 자신감의 증가(9%) 등의 성과에 주목했다. 관

찰한 모든 워크숍은 예술가들에 의해 주도된 창조적 과정을 ‘출발점’으로 강

조하였다. 개방적인 개념과 기법을 탐색할 충분한 시간이 주어지고 예술가

및 기타 어른들의 충분한 지도하에 아이들은 개인적 위험감수, 협력 분담 및

의사소통에 있어 긍정적인 발달을 보여주었고 자신의 예술 작품 제작을 시작

하고 진행하는데 자신감을 보였다. 이러한 일반적 학습 성과는 예술가, 아트

플레이 직원, 가족, 교사 및 환경에 의해 뒷받침되었다.

24

문화 시민권 (Cultural Citizenship)

그 작은 아이가 다가와서 내 옆에 앉아 나를 껴안는 게 좋습니다. 아이의 엄마는 울고 있는 것 같았습니다. 저는 그 아이가 자라서 원주민 깃발을 휘날리며 뛰어다니는 것을 원하지 않습니다. 자기자신을 이 나라의 일부로 인식하고 소속감을 가졌으면 합니다. -예술가

25

니었다. 일반적으로 짧은 기간에 수행되는 워크숍은 예술가가 이러한 복잡

한 이슈를 다룰 수 없었고, 또한 대부분의 경우 이러한 이슈는 아이들과 가

족이 아트플레이에 참여하게 된 주요 동기와 배치되었다. 학교 및 장기 워

크숍에서 문화적 지식에 비판적으로 참여하게 할 기회가 제공되는 것이 관

찰되었으나 아이들이 비판적인 대리인 역량을 개발할 가능성은 드물었다.

대부분의 워크숍이 단기로 진행되다 보니 아이들이 워크숍 기획 및 의사결

정 과정에 적극적으로 관여하는 데는 제약이 따랐다. 학교 및 장기 워크숍

에서도 여전히 아이들은 대부분 예술가의 계획 하에 활동을 하였다. 그러나

신규 작업의 개발과 정체성을 포함한 보다 복잡한 주제에 초점을 맞춘 집단

과정에는 일정 정도 기여를 할 수 있었다.

일부 워크숍에서는 핵심 목표로 관계 구축에 초점을 두었다. 이 목표를 달

성하기 위해 예술가들은 아이들끼리, 부모가 참여하는 경우 그들의 부모와

서로 관계를 형성하는 집단 체험을 할 수 있도록 계획을 세웠다. 이러한 관

계 구축 목표는 보다 광범한 지역사회 중심 이벤트에서 다른 사람들과의 연

계로까지 확대될 수 있다. 가족과 친구를 초대하여 자신들의 작품을 보여주

고 격려하는 공개 공연이나 프레젠테이션 및 전시회 형태의 이벤트는 보다

확대된 지역사회 연계의 기회를 부여했다.

문화 시민권이란 아이들이 아트플레이 워크숍의 실제적인 경험에서 그리

고 이를 넘어서 획득한 기회와 관련한 내용을 광범하게 포괄하는 개념이다.

이 개념은 조직 활동과 거버넌스에 기여할 아동의 권리와 이로부터 파생되

는 책임성을 중요시한다. 문화 시민권이 본 연구의 주요 초점은 아니었으나

연구를 통해 아트플레이가 어떻게 아동, 가족, 예술가와 협의를 하는지 관

찰했고 이들이 일반적 조직 의사결정에 어느 정도 기여할 수 있는지를 관찰

했다. 예술가들에게 별도로 시간을 주어 워크숍 평가를 문서화하게 했으며,

가족 ‘의견 개진’의 날을 두었고, 보조금 조달 위원회에 투표권이 있는 아

동 회원을 두었다. 이러한 전략은 문화 시민권의 원리에 조응한다. 보다 다

양한 목소리를 아트플레이 개발에 반영하기 위해 전담 인력을 두어 ‘접근이

어려운’ 다양한 배경의 아이들 및 가족과 관계를 형성했다. 잠재적으로 소

외될 수 있는 집단들과 관계를 형성함으로써 아트플레이의 범위를 확대하

고자 하는 의지는 후속 연구의 초점이었다.4

모든 워크숍은 어느 정도 ‘문화 시민권’에 관한 기회를 부여했다. 특히 소외

지역에서 온 아이들과 지원을 받아 워크숍에 참여하는 아이들에게 문화적

지식을 접할 기회를 제공했다. 프로그램을 공개하고 저렴한 비용으로 운영

하기 때문에 대부분의 가정이 워크숍에 참여할 수 있지만, 참여확대 전략과

과정을 마련하여 보다 다양한 계층의 아이들이 아트플레이 시설을 활용할

수 있도록 할 필요성이 있다는 것을 연구를 통해 파악하였다.

활동하는 예술가가 워크숍에 참여함으로써 아이들과 그 부모들에게 직접

적으로 문화적 지식을 접할 수 있는 기회를 제공하였다. 조사한 데이터에

따르면 아동, 부모, 그리고 교사는 예술가들이 어떻게 작업하는지를 볼 기

회와 그들을 개인적으로 만날 기회를 높이 평가했다. 이러한 만남을 통해

예술가와 이들의 직업에 대한 올바른 이미지를 갖도록 하였으며, 또한 예술

에 참여하고자 하는 아이들의 열망을 제약할 수 있는 오해를 불식시킬 수

있었다. 예술가의 존재는 중요하기는 하지만, 이것이 아이들과 부모가 워크

숍에 등록하게 하는 요인이 되지는 않은 듯하다. 그러나 아트플레이 멜버른

심포니 오케스트라 (MSO) 앙상블과 아트플레이 인형극단 같은 장기 워크

숍의 경우, 유명 예술가들과 함께 작업하는 영광 때문에 해당 워크숍을 선

택했다는 증거가 있다.

워크숍 내내 아동 중심의 공개적이고 창의적인 학습에 초점을 맞춤으로써

아이들에게 자체적으로 문화 생산 능력을 개발할 기회를 주었다. 지지적이

고 평가를 하지 않는 환경에서 상상하고, 창조하며, 만들어내는 기회를 제

공함으로써 아이들은 자신들의 아이디어를 탐구하고 소통할 자신감을 키

울 수 있었다. 예술가 주도 워크숍은 일반적으로 아동들끼리 공동작업 또는

아동과 어른의 공동작업 등 협동적 예술작품 만들기에 강조점을 두었다. 이

러한 작업은 아이들에게 다른 사람의 말에 주의를 기울이며, 자신의 개인적

인 관점을 피력하여 논의를 하고 협상할 것을 요구한다. 이러한 경험을 통

해 시민사회에서 성공적으로 기능하는 데 필요한 문화적 도구와 의사소통

능력을 발달시켰다.

문화적 지식과 관련하여 비판적으로 차별성과 공평성을 평가할 기회는 워

크숍에서는 거의 주어지지 않았다. 때로 아이들은 주로 예술가의 문화적 배

경을 통해 상이한 문화에 노출되긴 했으나 권력, 불평등 및 대리인 같은 이

슈 지향적 토론이나 작품 만들기에 아이들을 끌어들이는 것은 흔한 일은 아

4. http://education.unimelb.edu.au/news_and_activities/projects/아트플레이/the_access_program

26

참여 유도 (Engaging Practice)

예술가와 교류

예술가

실제적이고 개인화된체험

예술가 작품활동에 기반한창의적 학습

예술가 소통

예술가의 역할

계획되고 대응적인

시간

변형이 가능한 환경과 재료

공간

실제적

맞춤형

고무적

다기능적

리더십

지지적

혁신적

동기 부여된투자된

가치 놀이 및 창의적 학습

조직 아동 & 가족

개인적전문적

제약이 없는아동 주도연령에 맞춘흥미 있는 주제아이들의 목소리

공동놀이협동공동창작

멀티-모델커뮤니케이션

모델조력자모니터디렉터다른 어른과 역할 분담

교사부모아트플레이 직원예술가

느긋함속도가 조절된

다양한연결된

그림 5: 참여 유도

27

• 기획에 관련한 조언 및 피드백

• 놀이, 창의적 질문 및 혁신적 활동에 초점을 맞출 자유

• 전용 아트 스튜디오 및 양질의 재료 이용

• 유급 평가 시간

• 전문적인 학습 프로그램 이용

주최자로서의 역할을 하면서 아트플레이 직원들은 아이들과 가족에게 정

서적이며 실제적인 지원을 제공한다. 이를 통해 불안감을 해소하고 수용감

을 증진하는 긍정적인 환경을 조성한다. 참가자들이 도착하면 이들을 해당

장소에 안착하게 하고 곧 시작될 활동에 열정적으로 참여할 수 있도록 돕는

다. 참가 가족들은 건물 입구에서부터 환영을 받았다고 답했으며, 아트플레

이 직원들이 워크숍 전과 후, 진행과정 내내 참가자 한 명 한 명과 상호작용

했다고 응답했다. 이를 통해 부모들은 자신의 창의적 역량에 자신감을 갖게

되었다. 이러한 지원은 예술가의 창의적인 역할을 보완하여 단기 워크숍에

서 부족할 수 있는 연속성을 부여하고 참가자와의 연계감을 강화해준다.

재료 및 공간 등 직원들은 모든 것을 도와줍니다. 도움이 필요한 사람을 돕

고 화장실을 안내하는 등 상황을 통제하는 것 외에도 이들은 워크숍의 일부

로서 역할을 합니다. 주제에 대한 질문이 있으면 저에게 오곤 합니다. 제가

하는 것처럼 아이들을 지도하고 질문하는 데 참여하는 것만이 아니라 제안

도 할 수 있습니다. 우리는 아이들이 오기 전에 무엇을 할 지를 논의합니다.

도입부에만 참여하는 것이 아니라 워크숍 전체 과정에 참여합니다. (아트플

레이 직원 없이) 저 혼자로는 20명의 아이들과 아이들의 부모를 다룰 수 없

습니다. -예술가

창작 프로듀서 사이먼 스페인은 “조리된”과 “원재료’라는 메타포를 사용하

여 아트플레이 “스튜디오”의 토대가 되는 철학을 설명한다. 그는 아이들은

예술가로부터 “원재료”를 제공받아 이로부터 자신의 작품을 그들의 관심

사와 요구를 토대로 “창작”해낸다고 믿는다. 이러한 창작 능력을 뒷받침하

기 위해 아트플레이는 참여를 유도하는 예술가적 품질의 재료, 그리고 특정

활동을 위한 개방적이고 맞춤 설계된 스튜디오 같은 환경을 제공한다.

아트플레이에서는 사전에 결정된 어른이 주도하는 작품 제작보다는 탐구

와 집중에 더 초점이 맞추어져 있다. 이것이 아트플레이가 추구하는 예술

체험에 대한 접근법이다. 아트플레이에 동원된 예술가들은 이러한 지침에

따라 활동한다고 프로그램 매니저 알렉스는 설명했다. 그는 때로 예술가들

에게 “팔레트를 제한”하여 아이들이 “사물을 사용하는 혁신적인 방법에 대

해 생각”하도록 하라고 권고한다.

이곳은 한편으로는 창조적이고, 제약이 없으며, 따듯하고, 다양한 연령이

참여하는 공간이며, 다른 한편으로 이를 뒷받침하는 질서와 의도, 그리고

철학과 지침이 있는 곳이었다. 이곳에 처음 왔을 때 이 두 가지가 균형을 이

루고 있는 것을 보고 놀라지 않을 수 없었다. -예술가

예술가들은 예술 교육자이고 예술가이기도 한 아트플레이 직원들로부터

충분한 지원을 받는다. 아트플레이 직원들이 제공하는 지원은 참가자들을

환영하고 필요에 따라 워크숍 동안 예술가들을 보조하는 것 등 다양하다.

워크숍을 지원하는 직원들은 미취학 아동 및 초등학생을 대상(6-12세)으로

하는 모든 워크숍에 참석한다. 그러나 숙련된 예술가들이 대체적으로 자체

관리하는 장기 워크숍은 주최만 한다. 학교 프로그램은 아트플레이 학교 코

디네이터가 지원하는데, 이들은 예술가들과 긴밀히 협력하여 워크숍을 개

발, 시행, 평가한다.

95%의 예술가들이 아트플레이를 지지적인 환경으로 평가했다. 아트플레

이를 통해 예술가들은 다음의 도움을 받았다.

조직 (The Organization)

28

언제든지 변형이 가능한 아트플레이 공간은 각 연령 집단의 필요와 프로그램에 따라 맞춤 설계를 할 수 있어 참가자들의 집중과 즉각적 흥미를 유발할 수 있다.

이곳은 한편으로는 창조적이고, 제약이 없으며, 따듯하고, 다양한 연령이 참여하는 공간이며, 다른 한편으로 이를 뒷받침하는 질서와 의도, 그리고 철학과 지

침이 있는 곳이었다. 이곳에 처음 왔을 때 이 두 가지가 균형을 이루고 있는 것을 보고 놀라지 않을 수 없었다. -예술가

부모들은 아트플레이가 “아이들을 위해 특별히 설계”된 것에 감탄하였고, 아트플레이의 물리적ㆍ정서적 환경에 대해 “아름답다,” “안정감을 준다,” “여유

를 느끼게 한다,” 아이들과 가족의 특정 요구에 “유연하다”고 답했다.

아이들이 길을 잃을 만큼 공간이 크지는 않았습니다. 자유롭게 활동할 충분한 공간이 있고, 안정감을 갖고 창의성을 발휘할 환경이었습니다. -부모

예술가들은 미적 체험과 정서적 환경을 높이 평가했으며, 아트플레이 환경을 “집중을 방해하지 않을 정도의 아름다운 밝기의 공간”으로 묘사했다. 예술가들

은 또한 아트플레이 환경이 유연하다는 것, 그리고 복합적 기능을 할 수 있는 잠재성이 있다는 것을 높이 평가했다. 이는 예술가들의 특수한 요구를 충족시키

도록 변경이 가능하기 때문이다. 예술가들은 아트플레이를 “빈 캔버스”로 묘사하면서 “영감을 주는” 환경이며 “재창조 및 재구성”이 가능하고 “여러 구역

으로 분할”할 수 있는 환경이라고 설명했다.

물리적 공간 (The Physical Space)

29

아트플레이의 매력은 여러 가지가 있다. 중심가에 위치하고 있어 대중교통

과 주차장을 쉽게 이용할 수 있다.

그리 가까이 살지는 않지만, 전차를 타고 갈 수 있습니다. 거기서 야라강이

나 국립 빅토리아 미술관도 갈 수 있고 국립도서관이나 친구네 가족과 점심

식사도 할 수 있습니다. 아트플레이는 우리 삶의 큰 부분이 되었고, 큰 경험

이 되었습니다. -부모

아트플레이에 참여한 아동과 가족은 참여의 경험을 통해 혜택을 얻거나 배

울 수 있었다. 아트플레이에 오기로 선택하는 것은 그 자체로 예술 활동에

대한 관심과 의지를 보여주는 하나의 결정이다. 일단 아트플레이에 오면 아

이들은 활동에 적극적으로 참여하고 즐기도록 독려를 받는다. 도시로 여행

할 준비를 해야 하고 워크숍 비용(약 $AUS10)을 지불을 하기 때문에 아트

플레이에 온다는 것은 예술 및 문화 체험에 투자를 하는 것이다. 아이들의

관심사 또는 부모가 생각하는 아이들의 관심사를 토대로 부모들은 하루 오

락거리로서 또는 교육적인 효과는 내는 활동으로 기대를 하고 참여한다. 어

떤 부모들은 일련의 연계된 워크숍에 등록을 시켜 학습의 연장을 기대하기

도 하고 어떤 부모들은 다양한 일회성 프로그램들을 경험하는 기회를 선호

하기도 한다. 한 예술가는 “일부는 빨리 하고 쉽게 하는 것을 원하는 반면,

일부는 계획을 갖고 ‘우리 아이들이 여기서 많은 것을 얻기를 원한다’고 했

다”고 회고했다.

8세 미만 아이들이 참여하는 워크숍의 경우는 부모의 참여가 필수이고 대

부분 활동에 같이 참여한다. 이보다 연령대가 높은 아이들을 대상으로 하는

워크숍의 경우 아이들과 협의 하에 부모들은 관찰자로 참여하거나 기술적

지원을 한다. 부모의 참가 여부와 관계없이 모든 부모는 자녀를 데려다 주

고 데려가야 하며, 필요한 비용을 지불해야 한다. 이러한 지지적 가족 문화

는 아이들의 활동에의 참여를 독려하나 이것이 반드시 참여를 보장되는 것

은 아니다.

아동 및 가족의 기대치(Children and Family Expectations)

예술가(The Artists)자리를 잡고 앉았을 때 분위기는 매우 미묘했습니다. 처음에는 여기서 무엇

을 하려고 하는지 의아했습니다. 우리 아이는 비교적 산만해서 차분히 활동

에 참여할 수 있을지 걱정했습니다. 한 10-15분이 지났을까? 마술 같은 일

이 일어났습니다. 모든 아이들이 집중했고 예술가들은 아이들에게 무엇을

언제 보여줘야 하는지 아는 것 같았습니다. 모든 것이 너무도 완벽했습니

다. 예술가들은 아이들의 참여를 이끌어냈고 지시하지 않고도, 무언가를 나

누어주지도 않고도 아이들의 흥미를 이끌어냈습니다. 그들은 그저 아이들

이 원한다고 느낄 때 아이들이 스스로 참여하는 데 필요한 것들만을 제시하

였습니다. – 아트플레이 참여 부모

예술가는 아트플레이의 핵심 주역으로서 워크숍을 만들고 이끌어갈 책임

이 있다. 예술가와 아이들의 상호작용은 아이들의 참여와 학습을 이끄는 주

요 요소였다.

연결 (Connections)

예술가들은 편안하게 직접적으로 그리고 때로는 장난스럽게 자신을 소개

를 하며 아이들과 관계를 형성했다. 이를 통해 어색함을 해소하고 대부분

예술가를 처음 만나는 아이들의 참여를 유도했다. 예술가가 어떤 작업을 하

는지 직접적으로 언급하고 개인적 이야기를 섞어가면서 참가자들을 ‘정서

적으로 연결’시켰는데, 이는 예술가와 아이들의 관계 형성의 핵심 요소로

간주되었다(Galton, 2008; Barkl, 2006; Parks, 1992). 예술가들의 개인적

인, 때로는 문화적 삶을 아이들에게 노출시킴으로써 예술가들은 이 세상에

서 자신들의 위치가 어디인지에 대한 아이들의 인식을 제고하고자 했다. 토

착 구연 예술가는 다음과 같이 말했다.

그 작은 아이가 다가와서 내 옆에 앉아 나를 안는 게 좋습니다. 아이의 엄마

는 울고 있는 것 같았습니다. 저는 그 아이가 자라서 원주민 깃발을 휘날리

며 뛰어다니는 것을 원하지 않습니다. 자신을 좀 더 이 나라의 일부로 보았

으면 하고 소속감을 가졌으면 합니다.

30

예술가들은 실제적인 학습에 초점을 맞추지만, 산출물보다는 체험에 보다

강조점을 둔다. 이는 보통 학교 밖 프로그램으로 제공되는 ‘방법을 알려주

는(how-to-do)’ 워크숍과 대비된다. 부모들은 아트플레이가 지향하는 제약

없는 창의적 학습을 높이 평가했다.

이곳에서는 아이들이 집단 콘서트와는 다른 개인적 체험을 한다고 생각합

니다. 아이들은 이곳에 와서 자신의 경험에 관한 무언가를 만들어냅니다.

–부모

사람들은 이곳이 일률적이지 않다고 합니다. 상자 하나를 주고 모두 다 같

은 상자를 장식하는 것과 같은, ‘쿠키 틀’같은 예술 수업이나 프로그램들이

있습니다. 거의 색칠공부와 같습니다. 너무 지루합니다. 그러나 이곳은 창

의성 수준이 높고 훌륭한 환경을 갖추고 있습니다. –부모

개별 프로그램에 대한 요구는 서너살 나이차이가 있는 아동 그룹 대상 워크

숍에는 하나의 도전과제였다. 이러한 다양성의 요구에 부응하기 위해서는

연령별 발달편차가 두드러지는 미취학 아동 프로그램에서는 특별한 기술

이 필요했다. 학교 프로그램에서도 학년이 다른 아이들로 구성된 집단이 일

반적이어서 공동 작업에 익숙하지 않은 아이들이 많았다. 예술가들이 워크

숍에 참가하는 아이들, 특히 일회성 세션으로 구성된 미취학 아동 및 공공

프로그램에 참가하는 아이들에 대한 정보를 얻을 수 없었기 때문에 아이들

의 개인적 관심사나 요구에 부응한다는 것은 더욱 어려웠다. 그러나 이러한

어려움에도 불구하고 아트플레이 직원과 교사 그리고 부모의 지원을 기반

으로 한 예술가의 경험은 개인에 특화된 경험과 학습에 대한 강력한 토대를

제공했다.

다양한 관심사와 역량에 부응하는, 자율적이고 개인화된 창의적 학습 촉진

을 위해 예술가들은 계획되고 대응적인 접근법을 취했다. 다음에서 묘사되

듯이 예술가들은 아이들에게 제공되는 활동에 명확히 초점을 맞춰야 한다

는 것을 잘 인지하고 있었다.

미취학 아동들은 창의적인 놀이와 이야기를 시작할 강력한 기초가 필요합

니다. 그것은 강력한 연상작용을 하는 디자인이나 풍부한 이야기 시작 포인

트 또는 잘 짜인 질문이 될 수도 있습니다. 20명의 아이들과 작업을 하려면

명확한 방향과 확실한 지도 하의 집단 작업이 필요합니다. –예술가

그러나 계획 수립에 노력을 들이는 것이 반드시 성공을 보장하지는 않는다.

아이들의 즉각적인 요구와 관심사에 대응하는 능력도 중요하다고 예술가

들은 말했다. 이들은 워크숍 구성과 ‘출발점’에 대한 아이디어도 중요하지

만 속도 및 내용 면에서 “유연성을 가지고 조정을 하는 것”도 똑같이 중요

하다고 했다.

형태의 경직된 과정 또는 프레젠테이션은 어떤 형태든 가족과 아이들의 의

도와 기대에 배치됩니다. 예술가들이 소통 및 접근 방법 그리고 목표에 개

방적이고 유연성을 보일 때 효과가 더 좋습니다. –예술가

가족들은 자신의 아이들과 작업하는 데 이와 같은 균형적인 접근법을 지지

했다. 한 부모는 다음과 같이 말했다.

중요한 것은 프로그램의 다양성과 개방성이라고 생각합니다. 프로그램을

사전에 완벽히 구성해놓고 아이들이 참여하기를 기대할 수 없습니다. 이미

만들거나 해놓은 것에 구애되지 않고 아이들이 개별적으로 만들어갈 여지

를 남기며 ‘스토리’ 구성을 할 수 있다고 생각합니다. –부모

가능성을 염두에 두고 계획하는 이러한 능력은 예술가가 선호하는 초청 형

식의 접근법에 조응할 뿐만 아니라 아이들에게 그들의 관점을 제시하고 스

스로 작품을 만들어갈 기회를 부여했다.

실제적 체험 및 개인화된 체험(Practical and Personalized Experiences)

계획되고 대응적인 접근(Planned and Responsive)

31

아이들은 실제적인 활동에 흥미를 가지고 있고, 워크숍 소개는 “간결하고 분명해야 하며 마치 정해진 답이 있는듯한 시범을 보여서는 안 된다”는 것을 예술

가들은 인지하고 있었다. 한 예술가는 “말과 설명을 줄이는 것이 최선”이라고 했는데, 이는 아이들과 관계를 만들고 참여를 유도하려면 효과적인 의사소통

이 필요함을 예술가들은 분명히 인지하고 있다는 것을 보여준다(Barkl 2006; Pringle, 2002). 예술가들은 아이들의 참여를 유도하고 지속시키기 위해 다양

한 소통 방법을 이용했다. 예를 들어, 연령대가 낮은 아이들과 작업을 하는 예술가들은 구체화된 구두 소통방식 및 시각적 소통방식으로 참여를 유도했다.

이러한 역량은 예술가가 선호하는, 추상적인 구두 설명보다는 구체적인 시범에 의존하는 방식과 조응한다. 예술가들이 효과적으로 의사소통을 할 수 있었

다는 사실은 예술가들은 의사소통 능력이 부족하다는 오랫동안 지속되었던 근거 없는 믿음이 잘못되었다는 것을 보여준다. 표현 및 대응에 대한 다양한 방

식에 초점을 맞추는 것은 다상징적(multi-symbolic) 통합(integrated) 학습에 대한 옹호와 맞닿는다(Dyson, 1990, Wright, 2011, Connery, John-Steiner &

Marjanovic-Shane, 2010).

소통 (Communication)

32

참여와 학습을 촉진하기 위해 예술가들은 다양한 역할, 특히 모델, 조력자,

참여 모니터 및 디렉터의 역할 사이를 바삐 오가며 수행해야 한다. 이러한

역할은 기타 예술가, 직원, 교사 및 부모/보호자 등 아트플레이의 다른 인력

들과 공동으로 수행된다.

예술가들은 예술 과정과 기법을 일반적으로 모델화된 활동을 통해 소개

하고, 설명하며 유도하는데, 이는 다른 연구 결과와 일치하였다(Pringle,

2002; Barkl 2006; Brice-Heath & Wolf 2005). 이러한 방식은 아이들을 다

양한 수준으로 참여하게 하고, 예술가의 전문적인 정체성을 보강하고 아이

들에게 높은 수준의 구체적인 지식에 노출시켜주었다. 모델링은 감화를 주

는 사례를 제시하는 것에서부터 구체적인 기술을 제공하는 것까지 다양했

다. 전반적으로 기술에 기반한 설명은 개인적 요구에 맞추어 제공되었다.

아이들의 구체적이고 단기적 요구와 연계되지 않는 교훈적 기술 기반 설명

은 아이들을 참여를 이끌어내지 못했다.

아이들의 요구에 맞춰 예술가들은 재빨리 대응하고 아이들의 반응을 개인

적 관심사와 목표와 조율하고 필요할 경우 조언을 해주어야 했다. 아이들의

참여를 이끌어내려면 아이들이 스스로 탐구할 기회를 가지고 이에 따른 피

드백을 받아야 한다(Csikszentmihalyi, 1997). 조력자의 역할을 하면서 예

술가들은 아이들과 상호작용하는 데 있어 편안하고 개인화된 접근법을 취

했다. 예술가들은 대화체의 비계(scaffold)적 소통을 지향하는데(Galton,

2008), 이는 아이들이 주도한 개별적인 소규모 집단의 체험을 강조하는 스

튜디오 환경의 워크숍에서 특히 두드러지게 나타났다. 한 학생이 이러한 예

술가의 조력을 다음과 같이 적절히 표현했다.

[예술가들은] 절대 우리가 하는 것을 싫어한다고 말하지 않았습니다. 전혀

새로운 안을 제시하는 대신에, 더 잘하도록 무엇을 해야 할지 항상 조언을

해주었습니다.

공연이나 공동 프레젠테이션 같은 집단 예술 작업을 할 때, 예술가들은 또

한 디렉터 역할을 했다. 이 역할은 아트플레이 멜버른 심포니 오케스트라

(MSO) 앙상블과 아트플레이 인형극단 같은 충분한 기량과 경험이 있는 아

이들을 대상으로 한 다중 세션 워크숍에서 두드러졌다. 이 경우 예술가와

아이들 사이에 멘토-멘티 관계가 성립되는 것이 보였다.

예술가들은 언제 아이들과 소통하고 언제 한 발 물러서 아이들 간에 스스로

배울 수 있는 기회를 제공해야 할지 판단을 능숙하게 해야 했다. 이러한 ‘참

여 모니터’의 역할은 독립성과 아동 주도 창의적 과정을 저해하지 않고 자

유를 허락하는 전략이 필요하다. 때로 아이들은 참여하기를 꺼려하거나 또

는 너무 적극적이어서 다른 아이들에 군림하는 경우도 있었다. 전자의 경

우, 아트플레이 직원과 부모의 도움을 받아 일대일 지원을 통해 다시 참여

하도록 하였으나 항상 성공하지는 않았다. 다른 아이들에 군림하거나 집중

을 방해하는 경우 예술가들은 권위적인 아동 관리 방법을 쓰지 않고 대신

아이들에게 다시 집중하도록 시간을 주었다. 이렇게 시간적 유연성을 발휘

하는 것은 매우 중요하였다. 필요하면 아이들은 스스로 ‘중간휴식’을 가지

며 장난을 치고 때로는 말썽도 부릴 수 있지만 예술가들은 일반적으로 이러

한 행동에 제약을 두지 않으면서 편안하고 부드러운 재담을 통해 이러한 행

동을 완화시키고 다른 데로 초점을 돌리도록 했다. 한 교사가 언급했듯이,

예술가들은 공동 창작자로서 예술가와 아동간의 계약을 깰 수 있는 행동 ‘관리자’의 역할을 하는 것은 피했다.

처음 보는 아이들, 때로는 40명이나 되는 아이들과 작업하면서 예술가들은

보통 둘씩 짝을 지어 참여한다. 관찰한 18개 워크숍 중 11개 워크숍을 예술

가 팀이 이끌었고, 아이들의 참여작업이 많은 미취학 아동 워크숍은 예술가

들이 짝을 지어 이끌었다. 참여를 지속시키고 학습 효과를 증진시키기 위해

예술가, 아트플레이 직원 및 교사 간 역할 분담이 효율적으로 되어야 했다.

예를 들어, 한 예술가는 대표 커뮤니케이터나 디렉터 역할을 하고 보조 예

술가, 아트플레이 직원이나 교사는 집중력이 떨어진 아이들은 관리했다.

아트플레이는 부모들을 아이들과 함께 참여하도록 독려한다. 특히 미취학

아동을 대상으로 한 프로그램은 부모들이 참여할 것을 권고한다. 이러한 권

유에 부모들이 긍정적으로 반응한다는 것을 한 부모의 다음의 발언을 통해

알 수 있다.

잘 기억나지 않지만 첫 수업 후 프로그램이 어땠는지, 즐거웠는지 물었고,

나는 모든 것을 내려놓고 참여했기 때문에 정말 신나게 즐겼고, 교외에서

온 사람이 참여한 그룹 외에 다른 데서는 볼 수 없는 사람들의 일원이 되었

다고 대답했습니다. 정말 모든 것을 내려놓은 경험이었습니다. 무엇을 하

고 있는지, 어떻게 행동하고 있는지 전혀 신경 쓸 필요가 없었습니다. 아이

들도 이를 알아차렸습니다. 아이들은 광대가 된 아빠를 볼 수 있었습니다.

-부모

즐거운 학습에 대한 열정을 모델로 보여줌으로써 부모들은 지시가 아니라

독려로써 아이들의 참여를 이끌어냈다(O’Reilly & Bornstein, 1993). 일부

예술가에게는 부모의 참여는 아이들과 교류할 때 부모도 모델링하고 지도

해야 하는 민감한 이슈였다. 아트플레이에 참여한 또 다른 부모는 “아이들

을 위해서 하는 것이라기 보다는 협동 작업이었다”라고 말했다. 이 말은 부

모가 아이들을 과도하게 지시하거나 아이들 스스로의 과정을 통해 배울 수

있도록 하지 않는다면 부모의 참여가 아이들의 작업에 잠재적으로 부정적

인 영향을 미칠 수 있음을 의미한다. 이러한 개입은 또한 예술가가 세운 목

표, 특히 아이들이 주도하는 창의적 학습을 이루려는 목표와 충돌할 수 있다.

역할 (Roles)

33

예술가들은 보통 공동으로 놀이를 하면서 그들 스스로가 모델이 되어 아이

들을 독려하고 일부 경우에는 부모들도 독려하여 참여하도록 하였다. 특히

어린 아동들의 퍼포먼스 아트 워크숍에서 이런 경향이 두드러졌다. 관찰한

모든 워크숍에서 예술가들은 아이들을 독려하여 자신의 아이디어와 재료를

활용하도록 하여 기대 이상의 성과를 내고 가능성을 도출하도록 했다. 이러

한 점에서 놀이는 창의적 탐구와 같았다. 예술가들은 자신의 작품 활동에 기

반해 협동 프로젝트에 노력을 기울였는데, 특히 연령대가 높은 아이들과 학

교 워크숍이나 아트플레이 연극단을 통해 관계가 이미 성립된 아이들이 참

여하는 다중 세션 프로그램에서 이러한 경향이 두드러졌다. 서로 모르는 어

린 아동들이 참여하는 단일 세션 워크숍의 경우, 예술가들은 집단 창작 성과

에 초점을 맞춘 협동 작업은 기대하지 않았다. 다른 연구 결과와 마찬가지로,

예술가들은 공동 놀이, 협동 및 공동 창작 등 창의적인 과정에 아이들의 참

여를 유도하는 데 능숙했다 creation (Galton, 2008; Pringle, 2002; Selkrig,

2009;Brice-Heath & Wolf, 2005).

일부 예술가의 경우, 아이들과의 작업을 통해 개인적 작품 활동에 도움을 얻

었고 아이들과의 작업은 자신의 작품 활동의 일부가 되었다. 설문에서 다수

의 예술가들이 아이들과의 작업은 자신의 작품 활동과 ‘서로 떼어놓을 수 없

는’ 관계였다고 답했다. 한 예술가는 “내 개인 창작 작업과 아이들과의 작업

간의 구분을 짓지 않는다. 모두 나의 창작 작업의 일환이다”라고 말했다. 이

러한 신념을 토대로 아트플레이 멜버른 심포니 오케스트라(MSO) 앙상블과

아트플레이 인형극단 같은 일부 워크숍에서 공동 창작에 강조점이 주어졌다.

이러한 프로그램은 디렉터와 모델로 역할을 하는 성인 작업자와 함께 아이들

을 ‘예술가’로서 활동에 참여할 수 있게 한다. 인형극단의 경우 예술가와 아

이들 사이에 멘토-멘티 관계가 성립되는 것을 볼 수 있었다. 아트플레이 멜버

른 심포니 오케스트라(MSO) 앙상블과 아트플레이 인형극단 참가 학생들은

모두 숙련된 성숙한 아이들이었고 충분한 시간을 가지고 그들의 아이디어와

기량을 활용해 예술가적 질을 담보하는 공연을 만들어낼 수 있었다. 예술가

들은 아이들을 창의성 메커니즘에 집중하도록 했다. 이것이 이러한 프로그램

에서 가장 두드러지게 나타난 것이었다. 창의성 메커니즘이란 아이들이 문제

를 해결하면서 혁신적이고 완성된 성과를 내는 창의적인 과정이다. 예술가들

은 아이들과의 공동 창작 작업을 통해 자신의 지식을 전달할 뿐만 아니라 역

으로 아이들로부터 배우는 경험을 갖게 되었다. 이를 한 예술가는 “워크숍은

우리에게는 아이들부터 어떻게 배울 것인지를 배울 수 있게 한 기회였다. 역

동적인 방식으로 우리는 아이들의 창의성을 자유롭게 따라 배울 수 있었다”

라고 적절히 표현했다. 그러나 단일 세션 공개 워크숍이나 아이들 간 협동 작

업이나 개별 작업에 초점을 맞춘 학교 워크숍에서는 예술가들과 공동 창작이

이루어지는 경우는 아주 드물었다.

예술가의 작품 활동에 기반한 창의적 학습 (Creative Learning Informed by the Artists’ Practice)

34

예술가들은 아이들에게 영감을 주고 집중을 시키기 위해 의도적으로 환경을

변경했다. 아이들에게 제공하는 재료와 환경을 통해 아이들과 자신의 지식과

전문성을 공유했다. 큰 은색 튜브 같은 소도구가 설치된 대규모 개방 공간,

모조 그림자 극 무대, 여러 작업대가 설치된 스튜디오 같은 환경 등 여러 환

경으로 변형하여 사용하였다. 이러한 공간 변경의 유연성은 반복적으로 참가

하는 학생 그룹을 집중하게 하는 데 중요한 역할을 하였다.

먼저, 개방된 공간, 움직이는 공간, 변화하는 가구 등 환경이 아이들을 집중

하게 했습니다. 아이들은 한 번도 같은 환경에 있지 않았습니다. 워크숍 후

반부에 들어와서 환경은 달라졌고, 계속 변화하여 아이들을 흥분시키기도

했지만 동시에 아이들은 이를 편안하게 받아들였습니다. - 교사

장신구 제작에 사용되었던 재활용 재료를 사용하고, 극장 워크숍에서 물결을

묘사하는 데 사용되는 색색 실크 천의 광택을 활용하는 등, 감각을 자극하는

재료를 제공함으로써 아이들의 참여와 호기심을 유도했다. 제어가 용이하고

창의적 변경과 상징화가 가능하며, 다양한 형태로 만들 수 있는 인지적 재료

는 또한 참여와 학습을 촉진했다. 이에 반해 인형 견본 같은 미리 정해진 창

작품을 만들어내는 재료들은 아이들의 참여를 유도하지 못했다. 이러한 재료

의 사용 ‘규칙’이 불명확한 경우 더욱 그러했다.

워크숍에서 일반적으로 사용되는, 서로 연결되고 보완적인 재료, 도구 및 자

원의 기술적ㆍ소통적 잠재력은 아이들의 참여하는 방법을 바꾸게 했다. 예

를 들어, 미취학 아동 대상 잼(Jam) 워크숍에서 어린 아이들과 이들의 부모

들에게 블럼(blum) 이라는 더블베이스를 친근하게 소개하면서 예술가의 세

계로 끌어들였다. 이에 더하여 무지개 색깔의 회전 공을 포함한 생기 넘치는

다양한 미적 재료를 제공하여 아이들을 사로잡았다. 아이들에게 또한 음악

제작 도구를 ‘즉석에서 연주’하게 하여 그들만의 인지적인 음악적 반응을 한

껏 이끌어냈다. 이렇게 재료, 도구 및 자원을 다양한 방식과 수준으로 이용하

게 함으로써 특정 기법과 과정에 대한 기술적 능숙도의 발전보다는 발견 기

반 학습의 중요성을 강조하였다.

변형이 가능한 환경과 재료 (Transformative environment and materials)

35

시간 및 시기의 효과적 사용은 활동의 탄력을 유지하고 아동 주도의 심도 있

는 탐구를 촉진하며 참가자의 개별적 집중도와 에너지 수준을 조절하는 데

필요한 필수적인 요소이다. 집단 참여를 유지하기 위해서는 예술가들은 생기

가 넘쳐야 하고 신체적으로 왕성하게 활동하고, 아이들과 적극적으로 교류해

야 한다. 일련의 다양한 활동의 속도를 적절히 조절해야 하는 퍼포먼스 아트

워크숍에서는 특히 그러하다.

가족단위 참여자들은 아트플레이의 느긋하고 편안한 환경을 높이 평가했다.

드롭인 워크숍 참가자들은 활동의 속도와 완료 시기를 스스로 결정할 수 있

었다. ‘만약 댄스(What If Dance)’와 아트플레이 멜버른 심포니 오케스트라

(MSO) 앙상블과 같은 일부 워크숍에서는 짧은 시간 내에 많을 것을 하도록

요구되어 참가자들이 시간을 많이 의식하였다. 이렇게 시간이 촉박할 경우

예술가들은 아이들은 명확하게 이끌고 안내해주어야 하나 성급한 방식으로

진행해서는 안 된다. 또한 아이들이 예술가로 대접받기도 해야 하나 성인과

다른 신체적 정서적 조건으로 집중도와 이를 유지하는데 영향을 미칠 수 있

다는 것을 인식하고 있어야 한다. 충분한 ‘중간휴식’을 자연스럽게 가져야 했

지만 아트플레이 워크숍은 전반적으로 효과적으로 속도 조절을 하고 있었다.

종일 세션은 연속적인 집중을 요구했다. 학생 집단의 경우 전용 시설에서 한

활동에 집중하면서 극대화된 종일 학습을 받을 수 있었다. 한 교사는 “이곳

에서 종일 활동하는 것은 마치 학교에서 일주일간 예술 수업을 하는 것과 같

다. 여기에 모든 것이 있기 때문이다”라고 했다. 한 학생은 “더 집중을 할 수

있었다. 학교에서는 주의를 분산시키는 것들이 많다. 여기는 모든 것이 있

다”라며 이 교사의 말에 동감했다.

시간 (Time)

36

아이들을 참여시키기 위해 프로그램은 개별 참가자 및 그룹의 특수한 요구에 맞춰 조정될 필요가 있었다. 아트플레이는 예술 속에서 또한 예술을 통한 학습에

초점을 맞추기 위해 프로그램마다 다르게 방향을 설정했다. 아이들의 연령과 워크숍 기간에 따라 워크숍의 목표와 예술가의 핵심 역할이 정해졌다. 참여와 학

습에 대한 방향의 상이성은 프로그램에서 드러났다. 어린 아동을 대상으로 하는 단기 프로그램은 재미와 탐험을 통한 학습에 보다 초점을 맞춘 반면, 연령대가

높은 아이들을 대상으로 하는 장기 프로그램은 탐험 과정과 작품 생산 및 성과 모두에 초점을 맞추었다. 예술적 성과물을 기대하는 연령대가 높은 아이들이 참

가하는 다중 세션 워크숍의 경우, 특히 궁극적으로 하나의 퍼포먼스를 완성하는 경우, 예술가들은 디렉터로서의 역할이 커진다(그림 6 참고).

맞춤형 참여와 학습 (Contextualising Engagement and Learning)

그림 6: 참여 및 학습 방향

과정 및 놀이 지향

즐거움과 감각 탐험 강조

예술가는 조력자, 모델 및 공동

놀이자의 역할

예술적 성과 지향

창의적 탐구와 협동 강조

예술가는 조력자, 모델, 디렉터

및 공동 창작자의 역할

연령대가낮은 아동

예술을 통한학습

예술 속에서 학습

연령대가높은 아동

단일 세션

다중 세션

37

연구를 통해 참여와 학습을 유도하는 다음과 같은 긍정적인 환경을 파악하였다.

• ‘예술가적 품질’의 재료와 장비의 이용

• 집중과 자기주도 학습에 용이한 ‘스튜디오 같은’ 워크숍에서 적절한 시간 제공

• 예술가들의 필요한 기술과 기법의 시범

• 예술가들의 명확한 지도, 시범 및 모델링

• 명확한 계획, 정밀한 워크숍 목표 및 구성

• 순서, 속도 및 조직의 효과적 계획

• 예술가 팀과 아트플레이 직원과의 효과적인 역할 분담

• 과정지향적 아동주도 탐험과 구체적 예술작품 완성 및 프레젠테이션 모두에 주안점을 둠

• 재료, 구체적 기술 및 기법의 탐험 그리고 양질의 작품 생산 모두에 주안점을 둠

• 새로운 도전을 하도록 아이들을 독려

• 예술가와 아이들 간 편안한 관계 형성을 통한 정서적 지지를 제공하는 환경의 형성

• 아동의 관심사와 연관된 탐구(inquiry) 기반 프로젝트 주제 선정

• 개별 및 그룹 탐험의 기회 제공

• 협동 및 공동 창작의 기회 제공

• 참가자의 의견을 수렴할 기회를 정기적으로 제공

• 아이들의 관심사, 창의적 과정 및 실제적 기술에 대한 요구에 조응한 예술가의 조력 및 피드백

• 예술가의 시범과 다중 모델 소통으로 뒷받침된 간결한 도입부 구성

• 실용적이고 심미적이며, 인지적으로 풍부하고 유연하면서도 창의적 해석이 가능한 재료의 사용

• 구체적이고 단일 예술 활동에 적합하게 조성된 대규모 공간

• 참가자 가족을 편안하고 안전하게 느끼도록 해주며 진행자와 조력자로서 역할을 한 아트플레이 직원 구성

• 다양한 역량과 연령대(4살까지 나이 차이가 나는 경우도 있었음)의 아이들의 이용할 수 있는 워크숍 내용 및

활동 마련

워크숍을 통한 참여 유도 (Engaging Practice Across Workshops)

38

미취학 아동 프로그램

• 행동 관리 시 재미있게 주의를 환기시키고 일대일 독려를 통해 유연하게 예술 체험으로 통합시키는 등 지시보다는 지침을 주는 방식을 취함

• 창작 놀이를 통한 예술 체험

• 워크숍 전반에 통합된 다양한 다중 방식/다중 예술 체험

• 아동과 성인이 편안하게 착석할 수 있도록 조성된 환경과 특수 활동을 위해 필요한 시설이 구비된 전용 공간

• 예술가와 개인적으로 재미있게 접촉

• 다양한 역량과 연령대(2-5세)의 아이들이 이용할 수 있고, 직접적이고 구체적인 체험을 통한 학습에 초점이 맞춰진 워크숍 내용 및 활동

학교 프로그램

• 교사, 학생, 예술가 간 교량 역할을 하는 아트플레이 학교 프로그램 코디네이터. 필요하면 예술가와 함께 워크숍 작업을 진행

• 학생의 참여를 독려하고 행동을 통제함으로써 예술가를 지원하는 교사

• 종일 집중 워크숍

장기 프로그램

• 아이들이 특정 기술을 익히고 창의적인 아이디어로 새로운 도전을 할 수 있도록 하는 일대일 모니터링 및 소규모 그룹 모니터링

• 아이들의 예술가의 견습생으로서 참여

• 예술가의 명확한 지도, 시범 및 모델링

• 예술가의 전문적 경험으로부터 배울 기회 제공

• 사고를 촉발시키는 풍부한 탐구 주제

• 아이디어를 탐구하고 발전시킬 충분한 시간 제공

• 집중 종일 워크숍

워크숍 유형에 따른 참여 유도 (Engaging Practice Specific to Workshop Type)

39

결론 (Conclusion)

아트플레이는 예술적, 발달적, 그리고 문화적 요소를 독창적으로 결합함으로

써 아이들, 부모, 교사들이 예술가들과 직접적으로 교류하고 학교 밖 환경에

서 예술작업을 할 수 있게 한다. 따라서 아트플레이는 독창적인 연구 기회를

제공하였다. 우리는 아트플레이의 다양한 측면을 연구했으며, 참가자들이 아

트플레이에 참여하게 된 동기와 이를 통해 무엇을 얻었는지 조사했다. 또한

공동 예술 시설의 예술가 주도 프로그램에서 긍정적인 경험을 하게 하는 요

소가 무엇인지를 파악했다. 아트플레이가 제공하는 프로그램에서 대다수의

아동 및 가족 참가자들이 집중적인 참여를 한다는 것을 발견하였다. 핵심적

인 학습 성과는 자신감의 상승과 창의적이고 협동적인 학습 과정에의 참여였

다. ‘새로운 것’을 시도하게 되었을 때 아이들의 자신감이 상승하였고, 그럼

으로써 창의적이고 협동적인 학습 과정에 참여하였다. 학습에 대한 아동, 부

모 및 예술가의 관점에 대한 분석에 따르면 아이들은 실제적인 현장 학습 체

험을 높이 평가한다. 예술가와 부모도 이러한 학습을 높이 평가하였다. 또한

이들은 실제적인 예술 작품 제작을 목적에 대한 수단으로 보았고, 아이들의

창의적 사고 개발과 자신감 증대를 예술가들과의 작업을 통해 달성하는 것이

핵심 목표라고 했다.

부모들도 또한 많은 것을 얻었고, 아트플레이의 체험을 높이 평가했다. 향후

예술 활동에 도움이 될 아이디어를 얻은 것 외에 부모들은 아이들과 함께 작

업하고 자신의 아이들이 공공 공간에서 어떻게 교류하고 반응하는 가를 지켜

본 기회를 소중히 여겼다. 이 연구 프로젝트를 통해 얻은 지식은 멜버른 시와

의 공동 후속 연구로 이어져 도서관 및 공원 등 시내 다른 시설의 아동-가족

참여 상황도 연구하게 되었다. 또한 아동-가족 놀이 정책의 조기 개발에도 도

움을 주었다.

집중적인 종일 스케줄, 예술가-학생 간 수평적 관계, 그리고 전용 예술 시설

의 이용은 학생 그룹을 워크숍에 집중적으로 참여하게 한 주요 요인이었다.

학교 프로그램을 통해 얻은 학습은 아트플레이와 학교 간 효율적 관계 형성

에 대한 중요성과 요구를 강화시켜주었고 장기적 파트너십 구축과 유지의 의

지를 증대시켰다. 교사들은 연구진들과의 협의 하에 참여 프레임워크를 교사

들의 요구에 맞게 조정할 수 있기 때문에 이러한 파트너십의 잠재적 가치는

예술 영역에 국한되지 않는다. 또한 이러한 참여 원리와 학습 환경 설계 및

평가는 지역사회 및 학교 예술 프로그램에도 적용이 가능하기 때문에 다른

예술 파트너십에도 중요한 함의를 지닌다.

본 연구는 연구에 ‘풍족한 공간’ (Davis, 2008)으로 불리는 개방적이고 수용

적인 환경에서 수행되었다. 연구 전 과정에서 우리는 아트플레이에 관여하

는 모든 이들의 관점을 적극적으로 수집했고 형성 평가를 통해 지속적 성찰,

질문 및 교류를 촉진하여 목표를 정하고 프로그램을 확대하고 심화시킬 조직

의 역량을 강화하도록 했다. 또한 본 연구의 과정과 결과는 멜버른 교육대학

원(Melbourne Graduate School of Education) 과정에서 현재 여러 방면으로

참조하고 있다. 연구 및 학습에 있어 아트플레이의 가치는 지대하며, 다양한

과목에서 아트플레이에 대한 학생들의 관찰 내용을 평가 요건에 포함시켰으

며 아트플레이 리더십 초청 강의에도 포함시켰다.

요약하면, 본 연구를 통해

• 아동 참여, 학습 및 문화 시민권과 관련한 적절하고 접근 가능한 지식과 이

를 뒷받침하는 조건을 도출하였다.

• 예술가, 예술 조직 및 기타 전문가가 아동 및 가족과 함께 하는 작업 관행을

반추하고 설명하는데 도움을 줄 수 있는 다면적인 대표 사례를 제공했다.

• 아트플레이의 지속적인 발전과 성장에 기여한, 연구에 기반한 아트플레이

문화 발전을 이루었다.

본 연구는 공공 예술 시설에서의 아동-가족 참여에 관한 최초의 대규모 연구

이다. 예술 교육 분야에서 본 연구는 기간, 범위 및 깊이 면에서 매우 이례적

인 것이며, 전 세계적으로 관심을 불러일으켰다. 또한 국내 및 해외에서 많은

초청 강연 요청이 있었다. 본 연구의 타당성과 범위는 이미 아트플레이를 넘

어섰으며 예술 분야에서 아동과 가족의 집중적인 참여를 유도하고자 하는 모

든 프로그램과 시설에 중요한 함의를 지닌다.

40

본 연구에 관하여 (About the research)

아트플레이가 문을 연 직후, 아트플레이 현상을 연구하기 위해 멜버른 시

와 멜버른대학교의 협력이 시작되었고, 호주연구위원회와 호주예술위원

회의 지원을 받아 4개년 연구 프로젝트인 “예술가와 함께 하는 아트플레이

워크숍을 통한 아동 참여, 학습, 문화 시민권의 매핑 및 확대(Mapping and

augmenting engagement, learning and cultural citizenship for children

through 아트플레이 workshops with artists)”가 수행되었다. 2007년 7월

에 시작된 이 프로젝트는 3-13세 아이들을 대상으로 예술 및 놀이 체험을

제공하기 위해 특별히 설계된 공간 안에서 지속적인 심층 연구를 하였다.

시범 연구를 통해 얻은 결과물을 토대로 아트플레이에 대한 조사를 시작

했다. 아이들이 워크숍에서 어떻게 반응하는지(참여), 워크숍 체험으로부

터 무엇을 얻었는지(학습), 그리고 문화 및 지역사회와의 어떠한 광범한 교

류를 하게 되었는지(문화 시민권) 연구하였다. 또한 관례대로 이 영역과 관

련된 문헌과 연구에 대한 예비 검토를 확장하고 심화시켰다. 우리 연구진

은 아트플레이가 발전, 확대됨에 따라 이에 조응하여 우리의 사고를 확대했

고, 이에 따라 문헌 검색 작업도 지속했다. 우리의 참여(engagement)에 대

한 이론적인 이해는 아트플레이의 맥락에서 보다 심도 있고 복잡한 개념으

로 선형적인 방식으로 진화했다. 문화 시민권에 대한 탐구는 처음에는 개념

이 불분명했으나 보다 확실한 개념으로 발전했고, 다양한 관련 시각과 연

관된 우리의 연구와 아트플레이가 문헌에 나타나게 되었다. 우리는 전문

가 집단을 프로젝트에 끌어들여 이들의 지식을 활용했다. 우리 연구진은

학교 교사, 학교 밖 강사, 교사를 위한 전문 발달 지도자, 커리큘럼 개발자,

초ㆍ중ㆍ고등 예술 교육 평가사, 교사 지원 교재 집필가, 교사 교육자, 연

구자 및 예술가였으며, 또한 이들의 시각을 초기에 세 가지 영역 중에서 “가

장 쉽다”고 생각한 영역, 즉 학습의 영역으로 가지고 왔다. 역설적이게도, 학

습은 아트플레이와 관련하여 가장 개념화하기 어려운 영역으로 판명되었다.

41

우리는 민족지적(ethnographic) 참여 행동(participatory action) 연구에 조응한 복합 방법 접근법(mixed-methods approach)을 도입했다(Delamont,

2012;Creswell & Plano Clark, 2011; Campbell & Groundwater-Smith, 2010; Whyte, 1991). 다중 관찰, 예술가와 아트플레이 직원 및 주요 이해관계자의

인터뷰, 가족 설문, 가족 표적 집단 및 회의록 등을 데이터로 수집했다. 다양한 예술 형식과 연령대 및 워크숍 유형을 대표하는 샘플로 18개의 워크숍을 선정

하여 상세 분석을 하였다. 워크숍 유형은 다음의 네 가지가 있다.

• 3-5세 대상 미취학 아동 워크숍

• 6-13세 대상 공공 워크숍

• 7-13세 대상 학교 워크숍

• 7-13세 대상 장기 워크숍

(전체 목록은 부록을 참고하시오)

참여(Engagement)참여(engagement)는 예술 교육과 교육 심리학 영역의 일반 개념이며, 주로 이론적 관점에 의거했다(Russell, Ainley & Frydenberg, 2005, Wefald &

Downey, 2009). 또한 아동 참여를 파악하고 매핑할 도구, 지표 및 방법의 사례를 탐색했다(Chapman, 2003, Chappell & Young, 2007, Jones, 2009). 관찰

과 인터뷰 및 표적 집단을 통해 수집된 데이터를 이용해 아트플레이의 특정 맥락과 관련하여 참여를 해석할 방법을 시험하고 만들어냈다. 참여의 일반 개념

은 개시(initiation), 지속적인 전념(sustained dedication) 그리고 몰두(absorption)가 특징인 자율적(self-motivated) 개입(involvement)의 긍정적인 정서적•

인지적 상태를 포괄한다. 우리는 아트플레이의 특정 맥락과 관련하 여 참여를 해석할 방법을 시험하고 만들어냈으며, 워크숍 기간 동안 그룹 및 개별 수준

에서 일어나는 사항을 정확하고 일관되게 파악하기 위해 참여 관찰 체크리스트(표 1)을 개발하였다.

참가자들이 자주성이 없거나 적고, 쉽게 주의가 분산될 경우 방어, 분열, 좌절과 같은 부정적 정서동기적 표현으로 불참여를 드러냈다.

상기의 체크리스트를 토대로 연구자들은 팀을 이뤄 참가자를 100시간 이상 관찰하였고, 이는 본 연구의 기본 데이터가 되었다. 관찰 결과 해석과 동일한 중

요성이 있고 또한 이를 보완하는 것으로는 참가자들로부터 나온 데이터였다. 우리는 참여 분석 시 아동과 부모의 평가 내용에 중요하게 활용하였다.

표 1: 참여 관찰 체크리스트

참여 유형

흡수(Taking In)

개입(Putting In)

자임(Taking On)

전념(On Task)

중간휴식(Time Out)

양태

언어적ㆍ비언어적 프레젠테이션과 시범에 지속적으로 주의ㆍ집중하고 수용력을 보여준다.

언어적ㆍ비언어적으로 자신의 아이디어를 기여하고자 하는 의지와 자신감을 보이며, 자신의 활동을 시작하고 이끌어 나간다.

과제를 열정적으로 자신감 있게 맡고 새로운 과제에 쉽게 집중한다.

상당한 시간 동안 적극적으로 정해진 과제에 참여하고 집중력과 정확성을 보여준다.

단 기간 조용히 참여를 중단한 후 다시 참여할 준비를 한다.

42

배경을 알 수 없는 비정규 참가자를 대상으로 하는 단기, 지역사회 기반 프

로그램은 발전 및 성취의 체계적인 증거를 찾기가 쉽지 않다. 예술 속에서

또한 예술을 통해 획득한 학습에 대한 평가는 매우 복잡하고, 이러한 복잡

성에 우리는 익숙해 있다. 이러한 맥락에서 상대적으로 짧은 기간에 다양

한 체험을 하고 한 그룹에 다양한 연령과 배경의 아이들이 참여하는 활동에

대하여 전통적인 사전/사후 테스트 형식의 테스트를 이용하는 것은 적절하

지 않았다. 대신에 학습 연구에 대한 보다 총체적인 접근법을 개발하였는

데, 이는 학습의 핵심 ‘구성요소’ (Leadbeater, 2001:6), 사회적ㆍ개인적 발

전(Arts Education Partnership, 2004), 그리고 “예술 형식의 학문에서 배운

생각하는 습관(habits of mind)” (Project Zero, 2010:7)을 고려한 것이었다.

학습은 지식, 기술 및 “배움을 위한 학습(learning to learn)” 기질을 포함하

고, 학습에 대한 긍정적인 접근은 하나의 자체적 성과로 간주된다(Hyson,

2008: 23). 학습에 대한 긍정적인 접근이 있었다는 증거는 자체적으로 예술

프로그램의 효율성과 가치에 대한 확실한 지표라는 것이 우리의 입장이다.

학습(Learning) 문화 시민권(Cultural Citizenship)문화 시민권은 문화적 학습과 지식, 그리고 의사소통 사회의 시민적 원

리를 구현하는 삶의 방식을 의미하는 역동적이고 다층적인 개념이다

(Stevenson, 1997& 2003a). 권리에 기초한 담화와 지배적인 발달 프레임

워크에서 ‘아동 사회학’으로의 전환에 기반하여 아동을 재 개념화 함으로

써 아동, 예술, 문화 그리고 시민권 간 접점에 관한 복잡하고 역동적인 관점

을 생성하게 되었다. 아이들은 이제 미래가 아닌 현재의 적극적 참여자로

서 그리고 세상을 해석하는 유능한 존재로서 인정 받는다(Cobb, Danby &

Farrell, 2005; Drury, 2006). 이러한 의존적이고 결핍된 존재라는 관점에서

능력 있고 권리가 있는 존재라는 아동에 관한 전환적 관점은 문화적 시민으

로서의 아동이라는 개념의 토대가 된다. 이러한 관점에서 시작하여 우리는

아트플레이의 실천 중심 탐구의 견지에서 문화 시민권에 대한 우리의 해석

을 보다 정교화했다. 상호 연결된 양갈래 분석을 통해 워크숍과 상담활동을

조사하였다. 그 결과 아이들을 문화적 시민이 되게 하는 워크숍의 여러 가

지 요소를 파악할 수 있었다(표 2).

표 2: 문화 시민권을 가능하게 하는 요소들

문화 시민권을 가능하게 하는 요소들 • 예술가와 직접적 만남을 통한 문화적 자본과 다양한 문화적 지식에의 접근

• 문화적 산물과 문화적 지식을 창안하고 창작

• 문화적 도구와 의사소통 역량을 개발

• 문화적 학습과 지식에 비판적으로 참여

• 지역사회와 연결하는 활동에 적극적으로 참가

43

아이들과 함께 작업하는 예술가들 (Artists Working with Children)교육 및 지역사회 기반 맥락에서 예술가와 아동이 관련된 예술 파트너십을

조사하는 연구가 점점 증가하였다. 예술가와 예술 조직 및 학교의 파트너십

에 대한 연구는 주로 파트너십 구조, 교사 훈련 및 학생들의 성과에 초점을

둔다(Fiske, 1999; Catteral, 2002; Catteral and Waldorf, 1999; Hunter,

2005; Horowitz, 2004; Galton, 2008; Imms, Jeanneret & Stevens-

Ballenger, 2012). 이러한 연구 작업과 동시에 예술이 사회적ㆍ공동체적

참여에 미치는 영향에 대한 관심이 높아져 학교 밖 지역사회 맥락에서 작업

하는 예술가들에 초점을 맞춘 연구가 진행되고 있다(Brice-Heath,Soep &

Roach, 1998; Mulligan & Smith, 2009; Bamford, 2006; Reiss & Pringle,

2003). 이러한 연구에서 예술가의 중요한 역할들이 자주 언급되었으나

이에 대한 심도 있는 연구는 많지 않다(Waldorf, 2003; Galton, 2008;

Pringle, 2002; Brice-Heath and Wolf, 2005; Rabkin, Reynolds, Hedberg,

& Shelby, 2011). 하지만 이러한 연구를 통해 모델, 커뮤니케이터, 공동 학

습자, 협력자, 지원자(scaffolder), 창의성 개발자 등 예술가의 여러 역할

을 파악하였다(Pringle, 2002; Barkl, 2006; Galton, 2008; Brice-Heath &

Wolf, 2005). Rabkin이 주도한 대규모 교사-예술가 연구에서, 연구 저자들

은 “예술가들에게 전략을 가르치는 것을 교육하는 것은 전문가들이 말하는

훌륭한 가르침의 원리와 일치한다”고 강력히 주장했다 teaching (Rabkin,

Reynolds, Hedberg, & Shelby, 2011: 2). 몇몇 연구는 또한 예술가와 아동

간의 정서적 교류의 중요성을 지적했다(Galton, 2008; Barkl, 2006; Parks,

1992). 아동과 결부된 예술가의 역할에 대한 연구는, Pringle이 말했던 것처

럼, “특정 유형의 창의적 활동에 대한 그림은 극도로 복잡하고 정교하며, 지

속적으로 다양한 서로 다른 역할을 수행하며 참가자들을 참여시키려고 여

러 방법을 사용하는 예술가가 관련된다”고 강조했다(2002:10).

이렇게 문헌 검토를 통해 예술가는 일반적으로 아동이 결부되는 예술 체험

의 사회적ㆍ교육적 성과를 달성하는 중요한 기여자로 여겨지는 반면, 이러

한 기여는 연구의 주요 초점이 아니었음을 발견하였다. 상기의 연구 보고에

서 누락된 것은 예술가의 배경과 신념, 이들의 예술적 전문성 영역, 같이 작

업한 아동의 연령, 작업한 맥락 사이의 상호작용에 대한 정보였다. 이러한

누락된 요소를 고려하면 보다 다면적으로 복합적으로 예술가가 왜 아동과

작업하는지, 그리고 어떻게 작업하는지 알 수 있다.

44

아트플레이 현장에서 우리는 아트플레이에서 무엇을 체험하는지를 아이들, 부모, 예술가, 교사 그리고 아트플레이 직원의 관점에서 묘사하고, 설명하며 해

석하는 데 몰두했다. 교류의 기회가 이러한 몰두로부터 왔으며, 이러한 기회를 통해 참가자들과 생각을 공유했다. 다수의 비공식적 교류를 통해 공동 성찰을

할 수 있었고 참가자와 우리 모두 분명한 가치 소통을 할 수 있었다. 우리는 또한 직원 회의에서 정보를 공유하고 기획 문서와 가족 포럼을 개발하는 등 보다

공식적인 과정에 기여할 수 있었다. 주기적 피드백과 교류를 이루어내려는 이러한 의지는 참가자와의 직접적인 관계를 유지하는 데 중요했고, 이를 통해 참

가자는 정보를 얻고 가치를 인정받고 있다는 느낌을 갖게 했다. 중요하게는, 실천 주도 이론에 의해 뒷받침되는 중층의 반성적 실천을 하는 아트플레이 자체

의 연구 기반 문화 개발에 기여 했다.

이러한 지속적인 생산적 교류는 여러 보조금 신청으로 이어졌고 아트플레이 프로그램 및 정책 개발로 이어졌다. 아트플레이와 멜버른대학교 파트너십을 통

해 얻은 중요한 성과물 중 하나는 호주예술위원회가 지원하는 ACCESS 프로그램5 을 설계, 시행 및 평가하였다는 것이다. 파트너십을 통해 지속적으로 교훈

을 얻음으로써 광범한 성과물을 생산하고 관계를 형성할 수 있었다. 지방 및 전국 그리고 국제적 차원에서 수행된 다양한 프레젠테이션을 수행한 것, 다수의

출판물과 프로그램 및 정책 개발에 연구 결과물을 활용한 것, 멜버른대학교 학생이 참여하는 다양한 연구 파트너십 활동을 한 것 등이 이러한 성과물이다(그

림 8). 본 연구를 ‘대표(represent)’하는 이러한 과정 전체를 통해, 아트플레이 직원들과 예술가들은 공동 저자와 공동 발표자로서 참여를 했는데, 이는 본 연

구에 내재적인 참여적 과정을 반영한 것이었고 프로젝트 내내 강조한 관계 형성, 공동 성찰 및 공동 소유의 관점을 보여주는 것이었다. 요약하자면, 본 연구

는 그림 7과 같이 몰두, 교류, 그리고 대표(representation)를 포함한 주기적이고 상호 의존적인 과정을 통해 발전하였다.

체험, 실천 그리고 이론 (Experience, Practice and Theory)

그림 7: 체험, 실천 및 이름

관찰경청

몰두

아트플레이프로그램대표 샘플의매핑

추가 파악된아트프레이프로그램매핑

전 조직 연구기반문화의확대

교류 대표

반영공동 구성

해석 재해석

소통비판

점진적 집중

5. For more information go to http://education.unimelb.edu.au/news_and_activities/projects

36

Artists as co-researchers

Artist Exchange

Learning Lounge

Arts and non-arts organisations

City of Melbourne units and staff

Teachers and schools

Other researchers, nationaland international

9th Asia-Pacific Symposium, Singapore 2013

Tate Modern, London 2012

Tasmania Early Years Foundation 2012

Vision to Reality, QSA, Brisbane 2011

Art Education Australia, Melbourne 2010

Learn, Hong Kong 2010

Early Childhood Research, NZ 2009

InSea, Osaka, Japan 2008

CoM Engagement Across the City 2013

CoM Signal Digital Engagement 2012

ARC Discovery submitted 2012

Australia Council CCPI 2010-2012

CoM Signal Scoping Study 2009

ARC Linkage 2007-2012

CoM ArtPlay Scoping Study 2005

Guest lectures given by CoM staff

UoM student site visits and research

UoM post-graduate research

CoM staff, divisions, management

Leeds City Council 2012

Faculty of Education,University of Cambridge 2012

Come Out Festival, Adelaide 2011

Awesome Children’s Festival, Perth 2011

ACE Colloquium 2010

Imaginate Children’s Festival Organisation,Edinburgh, Scotland 2010

National Portrait Gallery, Canberra 2010

Carte Blanche Theatre Company, Denmark 2010

Presentations2008 - 2013

Artists

ResearchGrants

KnowledgePartnerships

TeachingTate Papers

Australian and New Zealand Associationfor Research in Music Education

Victorian Journal of Music Education

Australian Journal of Early Childhood

Art Education Australia

Australian Journal of Music Education

Research Reports

Professional journals

Book chapters

Mapping South

Education in the Arts

Publications

Conferences

ResearchPartnershipOutcomes

Presentationsto public, government,arts organisations and

education fora

Figure 8: Research Partnership Outcomes

45

그림 8: 연구 파트너쉽 성과

36


Artist Exchange

Learning Lounge




























ACE Colloquium 2010





Artists

ResearchGrants


TeachingTate Papers






Research Reports


Book chapters

Mapping South


Publications

Conferences



education fora


연구파트너쉽

성과

연구보조금

예술가

출판

교육

지식 파트너쉽

프레젠테이션 2008 - 2013

컨퍼런스

공공, 정부, 예술 조직 및 교육 포럼에서의프레젠테이션

46

Adams, J. (2007). Artists Becoming Teachers: Expressions of Identity Transformation in a Virtual Forum. Journal of Art and Design Education, 26(3), 264-273.

Animarts. (2003). The Art of the Animateur: an investigation into the skills and insights required of artists to work effectivel in schools and communities. Twickenham, UK: Animarts, Guildhall School of Music& Drama and LIFT.

Arts Education Partnership. (2004). The Arts and Education: New Opportunities for Research. Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.

Bamford, A. (2006). The Wow Factor: Global research compendium on the impact of the arts in education. New York: Waxmann.

Barkl, L. (2006). Professional musicians and interactive education programs: skills, knowledge and expertise required and implications for training. In M. Anderson (Ed.), Backing our Creativity. Research-Policy-Practice. National Education in the Arts Symposium (pp. 79-82). Surrey Hills, New South Wales: Australia Counciil for the Arts.

Bowden, J., & Walsh, E. (Eds.). (2000). Phenomenography. Melbourne: RMIT University Press.

Brewster, C., & Fager, J. (2000). Increasing student motivation: From time-on-task to homework. Portland: Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory.

Brice Heath, S., Soep, E., & Roach, A. (1998). Living the Arts through Language and Learning: a report on community-based youth organisations. Americans for the Arts Monograph, 2(7), 1-20.

Brice Heath, S. (1999). Imaginative Actuality. Learning in the Arts during the Nonschool Hours. In E. B. Fiske (Ed.), Champions of Change: The Impact of the Arts on Learning (pp. 20-34). Washington, D.C.: Arts Education Partnership / President’s Committee on the Arts and the Humanities.

Brice Heath, S., & Wolf, S. (2005). Focus in creative learning: drawing on art for language development. Literacy (April), 38-35.

Burgess, L., & Addison, N. (2007). Conditions for learning: Partnerships for engaging secondary pupils with contemporary art. International Journal of Art and Design Education, 26(2), 185-198.

Burnaford, G. E. (2007). Moving toward a Culture of Evidence: Documentation and Action Research in the Practice of Arts Partnerships. Arts Education Policy Review, 108(3), 35-40.

Campbell, A., & Groundwater-Smith, S. (Eds.). (2010). Action Research in Education. London: SAGE.

Chapman, E. (2003). Alternative approaches to assessing student engagement rates. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 8(13).

Chappell, K., & Young, S. (2007). Zest Project: Report. Exeter: University of Exeter.

Charmaz, K. (2008). Grounded Theory in the 21st Century: Applications for Advancing Social Justice Studies. In Y. Lincoln & N. Denzin (Eds.), Strategies of Qualitative Inquiry. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Catterall, J. S. (2002). The Art and the Transfer of Learning. In R. J. Deasey (Ed.), Critical Links: Learning in the Arts and Student Academic and Social Development. (pp.162-168) Washington D.C.: Arts Education Partnerships.

Catterall, J., & Waldorf, L. (1999). Chicago Arts Partnerships in Education summary evaluation. In E. Fiske (Ed.), Champions of change: The impact of the arts on learning (pp. 47-62). The Arts Education Partnership and The President’s Committee on the Arts and the Humanities. Washington, DC.

City of Melbourne. (2005). Municipal Early Years Plan. A Plan and Vision for Children and Families in the City of Melbourne. Melbourne: City of Melbourne.

Cobb, C., Danby, S., & Farrell, A. (2005). Governance of Children’s Everyday Spaces. Australian Journal of Early Childhood, 30(1), 4-7.

Connery, M.C., John-Steiner, V. P., & Marjanovic-Shane, A. (Eds) (2010) Vygotsky and Creativity. A Cultural-historical Approach to Play, Meaning-Making, and the Arts. New York: Peter Lang Publishing Inc.

Costantoura, P. (2001). Australians and the arts. Annandale: The Federation Press.

Couldry, N. (2006). Culture and Citizenship: The missing link? European Journal of Cultural Studies, 9(3), 321-339.

Creswell, J.W. & Plano Clark, V.L. (2011) Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Los Angeles : SAGE Publications.

Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1997). Finding Flow: The Pyschology of Engagement with Everyday Life. New York: Basic Books.

Csikszentmihalyi, M., & Schneider (Eds.). (2000). Becoming Adult: How Teenagers Prepare for the World of Work. New York: Basic Books.

Davis, D. (2008). First We See. The National Review of Visual Education. Canberra: Commissioned by the Australia Council.Day,

Deasy, R. J. (Ed.). (2002). Critical Links: Learning in the Arts and Student Academic and Social Development. Washington: Department of Education.

Delamont, S. (Ed.). (2012). Ethnographic methods in education. Los Angeles;London: SAGE

Delanty, G. (2003). Citizenship as a learning process: disciplinary citizenship versus cultural citizenship. International Journal of Lifelong Education, 22(6), 597-605.

Denzin, N., & Lincoln, Y. (2000). Introduction: The Discipline and Practice of Qualitative Research. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of Qualitative Research (2 ed., pp. 163-188). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Department of Culture, Media and Sport. (2009). A Place for Culture: Developing a local culture offer for all children and young people. London: Department for Culture, Media and Sport.

Dewey, J. (1958). Art as Experience. New York: Capricorn Books.

Drury, M. (2006). Close Encounters: The Contribution of Dedicated Children’s Arts Centres. In M. Anderson (Ed.), Backing our Creativity. Research-Policy-Practice. National Education in the Arts Symposium (pp. 146-156). Surrey Hills, New South Wales: Australia Council for the Arts.

Dyson, A. H. (1990). Symbol Makers, Symbol Weavers: How Children Link Play, Pictures and Print. Young Children, 45(2), 50-57.

Eisner, E. W. (1985). Aesthetic Modes of Knowing. In E. W. Eisner (Ed.), Learning and Teaching the Ways of Knowing (pp. 23-36). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

37

Bibliography참고문헌

38

Eisner, E. (2002). The Arts and the Creation of Mind. New Haven: Yale University Press.

Ellsworth, E. (2005). Places of Learning: Media, Architecture, Pedagogy. New York: Routledge.

Fantuzzo, J., Perry, M. A., & McDermott, P. (2004). Preschool approaches to learning and their relationship to other relevant classroom competencies for low-income children. School Psychology Quarterly, 19(3), 212-230.

Fiske, E. B. (Ed.). (1999). Champions of Change: The Impact of the Arts on Learning. Washington D.C.: Arts Education Partnership / President’s Committee on the Arts and the Humanities.

Fletcher, A. (2005). Guide to Students as Partners in School Change. Olympia, WA: SoundOut.

Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Paris, A. H. (2004). School Engagement: Potential of the Concept, State of the Evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74(1), 59-109.

Galton, M. (2008). Creative Practitioners in schools and classrooms. Final report. The Pedagogy of Creative Practitioners in Schools. Cambridge, UK: Faculty of Education, University of Cambridge.

Ginsburg, R. R. (1999). The Importance of Play in Promoting Healthy Child Development and Maintaining Strong Parent-Child Bonds. American Academy of Pediatrics 119, 182-191.

Giorgi, A. (Ed.). (1985). Phenomenology and Psychological Research. Pittsburgh, P.A.: Duquesne University Press.

Giorgi, A., & Giorgi, B. (2008). Phenomenological Psychology. In C. Willig & W. Stainton-Rogers (Eds.), The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research in Psychology (pp. 15-33). Los Angeles: SAGE publications.

Guba, E., & Lincoln, Y. (2005). Paradigmatic controversies, contradictions and emerging confluences. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.), The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research (3 ed., pp. 191-216). Thousand Oaks, C.A.: Sage.

Gradel, M. F. (2001). Creating capacity; A framework for providing professional development opportunities for teaching artists. Retrieved 20 August, 2006, from http://www.kennedycenter.org/education/partners/creating_capacity.html

Grushka, K. (2005). Creative Engagements with Visual Culture, Communicative Knowing, Citizenship and Contemporary Visual Art Education. In M. Anderson (Ed.), Backing our Creativity. Research-Policy-Practice. National Education in the Arts Symposium (pp. 61-71). Surrey Hills, New South Wales: Australia Council for the Arts.

Horowitz, R. (2004). Summary of large-scale arts partnership evaluations. Washington D.C.: Arts Education Partnership.

Hunter, M. A. (2005). Education and the arts: Research overview. A summary report prepared for the Australia Council for the Arts. Sydney: Australia Council.

Hyson, M. (2008). Enthusiastic and engaged learners: approaches to learning in the early childhood classroom. Washington: Teachers College Press.

Imms, W., Jeanneret, N., & Stevens-Ballenger, J. (2011). Partnerships between schools and the professional arts sector: Evaluation of impact on student outcomes. Melbourne: Arts Victoria.

Jablon, J. R., & Wilkinson, M. (2006). Using engagement strategies to facilitate children’s learning and success. Journal of the National Association for the Education of Young Children, March, 120-123.

Jones, R. (2009) Student Engagement. Teacher Handbook. New York: International Center for Leadership in Education

Leadbeater, C. (2011). Rethinking innovation in education: Opening up the debate. Melbourne CSE.

Lee, N. (2005). Childhood and society: growing up in an age of uncertainty (Issues in society). Berkshire: Open University Press.

Losito, C., & Williams, J. (2001) The Impact of Educational Work on Artists’ Practice. UK: Centre for Creative Communities.

McCarthy, K., Ondaatje, E., Zakaras, L., & Brooks, A. (2004). Gifts of the Muse. Reframing the Debate About the Benefits of the Arts. Santa Monica, CA: Rand Corporation.

McWilliam, R. A., Scarborough, A. A., & Kim, H. (2003). Adult Interactions and Child Engagement. Early Education & Development, 14(2), 7-27.

Merriam, S. (1998). Qualitative Research and Case Study Applications in Education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Mertens, D. (1998). Research Methods in Education and Psychology. Integrating Diversity with Qualitative & Qualitative Approaches. Thousand Oaks, C.A.: Sage Publications

Mulligan, M., Humphery, K., James, P., Scanlon, C., Smith, P., & Welch, N. (2006). Creating Community: Celebrations, Arts and Wellbeing Within and Across Local Communities. Melbourne: The Globalism Institute, RMIT.

Mulligan, M., & Smith, P. (2009). Art, Governance and the Turn into Community: Putting Art at the Heart of Local Government. Paper presented at the Regenerating Community. Arts, Community and Governance, National Conference, RMIT, Melbourne.

Myers, D. E. (2003). Quest for Excellence: The Transforming Role of University-Community Collaboration in Music Teaching and Learning. Education Policy Review, 105(1), 5-12

National Advisory Committee on Creative and Cultural Education. (1999). All Our Futures: Creativity, Culture and Education Available from www.dfes.gov.uk/naccce/index1.shtml

O’Brien, A., Donelen, K., Martinac, K., & Coulter, K. (2006). Risky Business: Young people, collaboration and arts engagement. In M. Anderson (Ed.), Backing our Creativity. Research-Policy-Practice. National Education in the Arts Symposium (pp. 104-111). Surrey Hills, New South Wales: Australia Council for the Arts.

O’Reilly, A. W., & Bornstein, M. H. (1993). Caregiver-child interaction in play. In M. H. Bornstein & A. W. O’Reilly (Eds.), The role of play in the development of thought. New Directions for Child Development. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

O’Toole, J. (2006). Doing Drama Research. Stepping into enquiry in drama, theatre and education. City East, Qld: Drama Australia.

Oakley, K. (2007). Educating for the Creative Workforce: ARC Centre of Excellence for Creative Industries and Innovation and the Australia Council for the Arts. Melbourne: Australia Council for the Arts.

Out of the Box. (2005). Children, their Parents and the Arts: Some guidelines for working with parents of young children. City East, QLD: Drama Australia.

47





































37

Bibliography

38




































4839

Papastergiadis, N. (2006). The Limits of Cultural Translation. Crossing South: the South Project 2006. Satiago Gathering. Retrieved from http://www.southproject.net/south/TVPublications.html

Parks, M. E. (1992). The Art of Pedagogy: Artistic Behavior as a Model for Teaching Art Education 45(5): 51-57.

Pascual, J. (2007). Cultural Policies, Human Development and Institutional Innovation: Or Why we Need an Agenda 21 for Culture. Paper presented at the Expanding Cultures. Arts and Local Government Conference.

Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative Evaluation and Research Methods. Newbury Park, California: Sage Publications.

Pringle, E. (2002). We did stir things up’: The role of artists in sites for learning. Retrieved 18 August, 2011, from www.artscouncil.org.uk

Pritchard, A. (2005). Ways of Learning: Learning Theories and Learning Styles in the Classroom. London: David Fulton Publishers.

Project Zero (2010) Update on Current Work. Project Zero July 2010. Harvard University, USA. Retrieved 20 Novemeber 2011,

Prosser, M. (1994). Some experiences of using phenomenographic research methodology in the context of research in teaching and learning. In J. Bowden & E. Walsh (Eds.), Phenomenographic Research: Variations in Method. The Warburton Symposium (pp. 31-41). Melbourne: Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology.

Rabkin, N., Reynolds, M., Hedberg, E. & Shelby, J. (2011) A Report on the Teaching Artist Research Project. Teaching Artists and the Future of Education. Chicago: NORC at the University of Chicago. http://www.norc.org/Research/Projects/Pages/Teaching-Artists-Research-Project-TARP.aspx (retrieved 24th Nov 2011)

Reid, Jo-Anne, Forrestal, Peter and Cook, Jonathan (1989) Small Group Learning in the Classroom, Scarborough and Sydney, Primary English Teachers Association / Chalkface Press.

Reiss, V., & Pringle, E. (2003). The Role of Artists in Sites for Learning. International Journal of Art and Design Education, 22(2), 214-221.

Royseng, S., Mangset, P., & Spord Borgen, J. (2007). Young Artist and the Charismatic myth. International Journal of Cultural Policy, 13(1), 1-16.

Rubin. (1981). The artist teacher. Journal of Education, 163(2), 135-143.

Russell, V. J., Ainley, M., & Frydenberg, E. (2005). Schooling. Issues Digest: Student Motivation and Engagement: Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations.

Selkrig, M. (2009). Community-based Artists: Dialogues of Identity and Learning. Unpublished Doctor of Education Thesis, La Trobe University, Bundoora, Victoria.

Simons, H. (2009). Case Study Research in Practice. London: Sage.

Sinclair, C. (2011). Teaching for the Aesthetic, Teaching as Aesthetic. In C. Sinclair, N. Jeanneret & J. O’Toole (Eds.), Education and the Arts: Teaching and Learning in the Contemporary Curriculum (2nd ed., pp. 43-53). Melbourne: Oxford University press.

South Project. South Kids. Retrieved 26th June, from http://www.southproject.net/south/SouthKids.html

Stevenson, N. (1997). Globalization, National Cultures and Cultural Citizenship. The Sociological Quarterly, 38(1), 41-66.

Stevenson, N. (2003a). Cultural Citizenship in the ‘Cultural’ Society: A Cosmopolitan Approach. Citizenship Studies, 7(3), 331-348.

Stevenson, N. (2003b). Cultural Citizenship. Cosmopolitan Questions. Berkshire, London: Open University Press.

Steele, J. P., & Fullagar, C. J. (2009). Facilitators and Outcomes of Student Engagement in a College Setting. Journal of Psychology, 143(1), 5027.

Szekely, G. (2006). 30 years of planning: an artist-teacher’s visual lesson plan books. Art Education, 59(3), 48-53.

Thornton, A. (2005). The artist teacher as reflective practitioner. Journal of Art & Design, 24(2), 166-174.

Throsby, D., & Hollister, d. (2003). Don’t give up your day job: an economic study of professional artists in Australia. Surrey Hills, Sydney: Ausralia Council.

UNESCO (2006) Road Map for Arts Education. The World Conference on Arts Education: Building Creative Capacities for the 21st Century. Lisbon, 6-9 March 2006. UNESCO. http://portal.unesco.org/culture/en/ev.php-URL_ID=30335&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html (retrieved 30 Nov. 2012)

United Nations. (1989). Convention on the Rights of the Child. Geneva: Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights.

Upitis, R. (2005). Experience of Artists and Artist-Teachers involved in Teacher Professional Development Programs. International Journal of Education and the Arts, 6(8), 1-11.

Upitis, R., & Smithrim, K. (1999). When teachers become musicians and artists: teacher transformation and professional development. Music Education Research, 1(1), 23-35.

Van Bakelen, M. & Bunyan, P. (1997). Arts Partnerships in Schools. Amsterdam: IDEA Publications.

Vandermaas-Peeler, M., King, C., Clayton, A., Holt, M., Kurtz, K., & Maestri, L. (2001). Parental scaffolding during joint play with preschoolers. In J. L. Roopnarine (Ed.), Conceptual, Social-Cognitive, and Contextual Issues in the Fields of Play and Culture Studies (pp. 165-181). London: Ablex Publishing.

Waldorf, L. A. (2003). The Professional Artist as Public School Educator: A Research Report of the Chicago Arts Partnerships in Education 2000-2001. California: UCLA Graduate School of Education & Information Studies.

Wefald, A. J., & Downey, R. G. (2009). Construct Dimensionality of Engagement and its Relation With Satisfaction. Journal of Psychology, 143(1), 91-112.

Whyte, W. F. (Ed.). (1991). Participatory action research. Newbury Park, Calif: SAGE.

Wilson McKay, S. (2008). Education as Installation Art and Other Useful Ideas from the Contemporary Art World. Art Education, 61(2), 71-.

Winner, E., & Cooper, M. (2000). Mute those claims: No evidence (yet) for a causal link between arts study and academic achievement. Journal of Aesthetic Education, 34(3/4), 11-75.

Wright, S. (Ed) (2011). Children, Meaning-Making and the Arts. (2nd Edition). NSW: Pearson

4939






































부록 심층 관찰한 18개 아트플레이 워크숍

미취학 아동 워크숍

공공 워크숍6-12세

학교 워크숍

장기 워크숍

더 가까이(Coming Closer)워크숍

플레이스케이프(Playscapes)

미취학아동을 위한 포켓풀(Pocketfool)

미취학 아동을 위한 잼 (Preschool Jam)

현미경 소묘 및 무용 (Microscope drawing)

강철맨(Men of Steel). 사물연극

스튜디오에서(In the Studio)

오마주 놀란(Homage to Nolan)

만약 댄스(What if Dance?)

그림자 놀이(Shadow Play)

라자스타니 도예 (Rajasthani Potters)

장신구(Accessories)

퍼포먼스 소묘 (Performance Drawing)

애니마스크(Animask)

소묘에서 음악으로 (Drawing to Music)

초상화와 책 만들기 (Portraits and Book Making)

아트플레이 멜버른 심포니 오케스트라(MSO) 앙상블

아트플레이 인형극단

Gillian

Rebecca & Ken

20-25

13

3 x 2 종일 워크숍

4 x 종일 워크숍

음악

시각 연극/인형극

8 -13

8 -13

Tamara & Sam

Jessica

Edna

Mia & Thaila

Lynne

Giri Raj Prasad & Manori Lal

Ricardo & Claudia

Zhen

Heri

Linda

Marianne

19

10

12

25

20

20

24

15

20

25

26

일회성 2시간

일회성 2시간

일회성 3시간

일회성 2시간

드롭인

일회성 4시간

일회성 4시간 x 2일





인형극/연극

시각예술: 조각

시각예술: 회화 및 복합 매체

무용/창의적 움직임

인형극 & 시각예술

시각예술: 도예

시각예술: 장신구 제작

시각예술: 디지털 및 협동 소묘

시각예술: 인형극

시각예술: 소묘와 음악

시각예술: 소묘와 책 만들기

6-9

7-9

6-12

4-7

5-8

10-12

10 -12

9-12

10-12

9-10

11 -12

Boori, Dominic & Victoria

Kath & Sian

Jen & Heidi

Nico & Martin

Briony & Gregory (Microscope drawing)

부모 동반 아동 16명





일회성 2시간

일회성 45분

일회성 1시간

일회성 1시간

일회성 1시간

6세 미만

6세 미만

5세 미만

5세 미만

6세 미만

복합유형(스토리텔링, 무용 및 시각예술)일회성 45분

시각예술 및 공예

복합유형: 드라마

음악

과학/시각예술/무용

예술가

예술가

예술가

예술가

참가자

참가자

참가자

참가자

기간

기간

기간

기간

예술 유형

예술 유형

예술 유형

예술 유형

연령대

연령대

연령대

연령대

50

미취학 아동 프로그램 (Preschool Programs)

아트플레이는 보조금을 지원받아 미취학 아동을 위한 포켓풀 프로그램을

정기적으로 매월 공개 프로그램으로 시행하게 되었다. 예술가 제니퍼와 하

이디는 어린이를 위한 “오리지널 연극”이 더 많이 필요하다는 것을 파악했

다. 아트플레이는 이 두 예술가가 자신의 퍼포먼스 기술을 활용하여 어린

이와 부모를 위한 상호적 워크숍을 개발할 기회를 제공했다. ‘트랜스포트

(Transport)’ 워크숍은 극적이고 재미있는 드라마, 음악 및 시각예술을 3-5세 어린이와 부모가 체험할 수 있도록 했다. 이러한 예술가가 주도하는 상

상 여행에서 아이들은 기차, 보트, 호랑이, 해양생물을 만나고 부모와 함께

마술 양탄자를 타며 절정을 이루었다.

숙련된 호주 토착 구연예술가이자 작가인 부리는 ‘더 가까이’ 워크숍을 이

끌었다. 이 워크숍에는 3-6세 아이들, 세 명의 어린 동생들, 그리고 12명의

부모가 참여했다. 보조금 지원을 받아 대표 구연예술가인 부리와 두 명의

숙련된 유아 교사, 시각예술 전문가 도미니크, 언어 및 지역사회 출판 전문

가 빅토리아가 협력 아래 2시간의 워크숍이 진행되었다. 부리는 원주민 악

기인 디제리두를 연주하며 참가자들이 스토리텔링에 따라 몸으로 표현하

게끔 지도하면서 워크숍을 시작했다. 그 후 아이들을 검은색 소묘 미디어가

있는 테이블로 인도되어 도미니크의 지도 아래 모노 프린팅과 블록 프린팅

을 했다. 또한 아이들에게 기억에 남는 스토리 부분을 이미지로 표현하도록

했다. 이 워크숍의 결과물을 모아 빅토리아의 주도 아래 “더 가까이: 가슴으

로 들어봐요 (Coming Closer: Listen with your Heart)”라는 책이 발간되었다.

더블린의 아동예술센터 더 아크(The Ark)에서 활동한 경험이 있는 아일랜

드 예술가 니코와 마틴이 주도하는 이 워크숍은 4-5세 아동과 부모를 대상

으로 하는 45분간 역동적인 즉석 음악 만들기로, 전체 즉석 음악 연주인 ‘잼

(jam)’으로 완성된다. 워크숍 내내 아이들끼리 스스로 또는 부모가 함께 앵크

렁, 벨, 호루라기 및 기타 새로운 악기를 가지고 음악을 공동으로 만들어간다.

오랫동안 모든 연령대의 사람들을 대상으로 음악 워크숍을 진행해왔지만 결

국 아이들을 위한 프로그램으로 돌아오게 되는 제 자신을 발견합니다. 아이들

과 작업하는 것이 좋고, 모든 연령대를 위한 워크숍 기법을 개발해왔습니다.

–니코

미취학 아동을 위한 포켓풀(Pocketfool for Preschoolers eschoolers) 무대예술

더 가까이, 토착 스토리텔링(Coming Closer Through Indigenous Story-telling) 스토리 및 시각예술

미취학 아동 잼(Preschool Jam) 음악

51

현미경 소묘의 홍보 책자에 “현미경 렌즈를 통해 신비하고 경이로운 과학

적 발견으로 가득 찬 작고 거대한 세상으로 들어가보자!”라는 문구가 있다.

이 워크숍은 실험실 가운을 입은 시각예술가 브라이오니와 과학자 그레그

가 시범을 보이며 시작된다. 3-5세 아이들과 동생, 부모는 1시간 동안 ‘사이

클로프(cyclop)’로 불리는 간단한 현미경으로 시작하여 나중에는 보다 정교

한 현미경을 이용하여 “과학자 놀이”에 초대된다. 아이들은 자신의 손, 딸

기, 타조 깃털, 컴퓨터 칩, 동전, 수제 종이 등 다양한 재료들을 현미경을 통

해 관찰한다. 그 다음 브라이오니는 아이들을 한 줄로 세워 살아있는 노래

기(millipede)의 확대 이미지가 투사된 스크린이 있는 공간으로 데려온다.

이후 아이들은 그리기 도구, 작은 현미경, 소묘의 참고로 사용할 미세한 물

체의 사진이 있는 책상으로 와 앉는다.

이 프로그램은 드롭인(drop-in) 주말 워크숍으로 아트플레이 건물 외부에서

카스와 사이언이 진행했다. 이 둘은 아이들과 작업한 경험이 있는 예술가이

다. 워크숍 공간에는 색색의 펠트와 작은 물 양동이가 놓인 여러 개의 트레

슬 책상이 배치되어 있었다. 아이들은 펠트 만들기와 클레이 놀이를 통해

각종 펠트와 천연 재료, 작은 집과 형상 등을 이용해 자기만의 놀이 공간과

플레이스케이프(playscape)를 만들었다. 1시간 동안 진행되는 드롭인 세션

이기 때문에 언제든 새로운 가족이 도착하면 새로이 설명해주어 참여할 수

있게 했고, 이미 활동에 전념하고 있는 아이들에게는 끊임없이 펠트 제작을

지도했다. 20명이 아이들과 부모, 할머니 할아버지 또는 보호자가 함께 했다.

현미경 소묘(Microscope Drawing)미술/과학

플레이스케이프(Playscapes) 시각예술

52

공공 프로그램 6-13세(Public Programs 6-13 Year Olds)

이 워크숍은 예술가 시드니 놀란의 회고전과 연결되어 진행되었다. 2시간

동안 진행이 되었고 6-12세의 아이들이 참여했다. 부모들도 참석하여 여러

수준으로 아이들과 교류하며 지원했다. 워크숍은 슬라이드 쇼와 놀란의 작

품과 네드 켈리 시리즈로 명명된 일련의 회화 작품과 관련된 토론으로 시작

되었다. 아이들이 스스로 그림을 그리게 하기 위해 일반적인 회화 기법과

놀란의 작품의 특징인 복합 매체 기법을 설명해주었다. 나머지 시간에는 스

튜디오와 같은 환경에서 아이들 스스로 그림을 그리고 복합 매체에 대한 탐

색을 하게 했다. 아이들은 자유롭게 돌아다니면서 재료를 수집하고 놀란의

컴퓨터 이미지를 확인하곤 했다. 이스라엘에서 예술 치료, 교육 자원 개발

및 아동-성인 통합 학습 프로그램 영역의 전문가로 활동한 에드나가 워크숍

을 이끌었다. 참가자들이 그림을 완성하면서 워크숍이 종결되었다.

사전 예약이 필요한 2시간 주말 워크숍으로 4-6세 아이들이 참여했고, 이

중 3명은 남아였다. 미아와 타일라가 주도하였는데, 이 둘은 유명 아동 창

작무용학교에서 가르친 경험이 있는 숙련된 예술가들이었다. 어색함을 누

그러뜨리는 워밍업으로 시작하여 대규모 신축성 튜브를 이용해 개별적으

로 또한 그룹을 지어 창의적 움직임을 만들어보게 하였다. 아이들에게 연상

작용을 할 수 있게 하고 활동을 자극하는 음악을 틀어주었으며 아이들이 따

라 할 수 있도록 다양한 움직임을 선보였다. 또한 내내 아이들을 독려하여

개별적으로 움직임을 만들어내고 서로에게 반응하고 또한 음악에 반응을

하도록 했다. 아이들은 돌아가면서 댄서가 되고 관객이 되었다. 부모들은

관찰자였지만 두 엄마는 적극적으로 활동에 참여했다. 알루미늄 호일, 리본

및 기타 재료로 작은 구조물을 만드는 ‘설치(placement)’작업을 통해 그동

안 얻은 체험을 되짚어보면서 워크숍이 마무리되었다. 이 과정은 아동, 가

족 및 예술가 간 사후 워크숍 평가에 참고가 되었다.

오마주 놀란(Homage to Nolan)시각예술-회화

만약 댄스(What if… Dance?) 창작 무용

53

2시간 동안 진행된 이 워크숍에서는 6-9세 아이들이 ‘사물 연극(object

theatre)’을 만들었다. 사물 연극을 고안하여 국내 및 해외 공연을 한 타마

라와 샘이 주도했다. 이들은 등장인물을 어떻게 만들어내는지, 시나리오대

로 어떻게 연기를 하는지를 금속 비스킷 커터 스텐실이나 과일과 야채 같

은 일상 생활에서 흔히 볼 수 있는 사물들을 이용하여 보여주었다. 그 다음

아이들은 짝을 지어 사물 연극의 무대 역할을 할 허리 높이의 주춧돌 뒤에

서 작업을 했다. 몇몇 부모들은 옆에 앉아 아이들이 활동을 지켜보았고, 나

머지는 돌아가 세션이 끝날 즈음 돌아왔다. 아트플레이 직원의 도움을 받아

예술가들은 아이들의 공연 리허설을 지켜보고 조언을 해주었다. 아이들이

익살스럽고 재미있는 ‘사물 연극’을 상연하면서 워크숍을 마무리 지었다.

그림자 놀이 워크숍에 들어가자마자 5-8세 아이들과 보호자들은 그림자 인

형극을 위해 설치된 어두운 공간을 접하게 된다. 아이들과 작업한 경험이

많은 인형 예술가 린은 그림자 인형을 큰 스크린에 투영하면서 워크숍을 시

작했다. 간단한 지침과 예가 주어지자, 아이들과 부모들은 마분지와 막대,

기타 다양한 그림 도구와 콜라주 재료로 간단한 그림자 인형을 만들었다.

예약제가 아니었으므로 이따금씩 새 가족이 도착했다. 린은 반복적으로 워

크숍을 소개하고 지침을 주었다. 워크숍 내내 린과 아트플레이의 직원들은

활동 공간을 돌아다니며 아이들을 독려하고 지도하긴 했지만 대부분의 아

이들과 부모들이 주체적으로 활동했다. 아이들은 자신들이 만든 인형과 횃

불을 들고 어두운 공간으로 들어가 스크린이나 돔형 텐트의 내벽에 투영하

면서 워크숍은 절정에 이르렀다. 다른 아이들과 부모들과 함께 공동 연극을

하기도 했다. 참가자들은 45분에서 90분까지 머물렀고 8명에서 16명의 아

이들이 늘 공간을 채우고 있었다.

강철맨(Men of Steel) 인형극/연극

그림자극(Shadow Play) 인형극

54

이 워크숍 홍보책자에는 다음과 같은 문구가 있다.

현대 시각예술가이자 조각가인 제시카 뉴와 함께 종이와 마분지로 동물을

만들자. 가족이 참여하는 현장 워크숍인 ‘스튜디오에서’ 재활용 종이 등을

이용해 동물의 왕국 친구들을 만드는 법을 배울 수 있다!

토요일 오전 2시간 동안 진행된 이 워크숍에는 6-9세 어린이들이 참가했

다. 부모도 같이 참석해야 하는데, 대부분 아이들의 작품 만들기를 적극적

으로 도와주었다. 조각 전공 대학 졸업반인 제시카는 아이들과 작업한 경험

은 없었으나 본인 작품의 이미지를 보여주면서 능숙하게 워크숍을 시작했

다. 그 후 아트플레이 직원의 도움을 받아 동물 머리 템플릿을 보여주고 제

작 방법을 설명했다. 이후 네 개의 테이블이 놓인 넓은 공간으로 이동해 부

모와 아트플레이 직원의 도움을 받아 템플릿을 토대로 자신들의 3차원 동

물 머리 모양을 만들기 시작했다. 아이들 옆에는 색색의 얇은 카드, 빳빳한

종이와 콜라주 재료들이 놓여 있었다. 거의 대부분의 시간 동안 제시카는

별도의 책상에 앉아 글루건 사용을 관리하고 필요에 따라 재료들을 어떻게

연결하는지 설명했다. 아이들은 부모의 도움을 받아 각자의 동물 모양을 제

작하고 장식했다.

스튜디오에서(In the Studio)시각예술 - 구성

55

학교 프로그램 (Schools Program)

애니마스크는 4시간 동안 지속되는 워크숍으로 3주에 한 번씩 열린다. 인

도네시아 인형극 예술가 헤리는 본인의 어린 시절 경험을 언급하면서 아이

들에게 자신의 소개를 다음과 같이 하였다.

얘들아 안녕. 난 어려서 미술을 좋아했어. 그런데 가정형편이 넉넉하지 않

아 상상 속에서 그림을 그려야 했어. 상상을 할 수 있는 한 무엇이든 창작할

수 있단다.

아들에게 내준 과제는 정치적, 환경적 또는 사회적 이슈를 상징적으로 표현

한 마스크를 제작하는 것이었다. 두 여학생은 한 쪽 면은 물을 상징하고 다

른 한 쪽은 아프리카를 나타내는 얼굴을 제작했다. 두 번째 주에 학생들은

자신의 마스크를 더 발전시켜 그룹 인형극에 사용할 그림자 인형으로 만들

었다. 참여 학생들의 연령은 10-12세였고, 2명의 교사와 빈곤층 아동을 위

한 아트플레이 사우스 키즈(Sounth Kids) 프로젝트 코디네이터가 이 워크

숍을 지원했다.

무대와 같은 환경으로 설치된 라자스타니 도예 워크숍은 학생들이 전통의

상을 입은 인도 도예가 기리 라자 프라사디와 마노리 랄 주위로 둘러 앉으

며 시작되었다. 이들은 두 개의 돌로 된 수동 물레와 도자기를 앞에 두고 자

리를 잡았다. 이 종일 워크숍에는 10-12세 아이들이 참가했다. 전통적인 방

법을 사용하여 두 도예가는 도예 기술 시범을 보인 다음 같이 도자기를 만

들도록 아이들을 독려하였다. 프라사디는 “오늘 아이들이 만든 도자기는

아이들 마음에 각인이 되어 집으로 가져갈 것입니다. 8천 킬로미터 떨어진

인도에서 온 누군가를 만나고 가족처럼 대하는 것은 색다른 경험입니다. 아

이들은 이 경험을 마음에 영원히 새기게 될 것입니다”라고 했다. 워크숍 후

반부에 학생들은 디자인을 만들어 자신의 도자기에 새겨 넣었다. 도자기는

몇 일 후 공개 가마 굽기 행사에서 구워졌다. 참가 학생들은 멜버른 도심 학

교 학생들인데 대부분 동남아시아 이민자들의 후손이었다. 교사인 팸과 사

회복지사 캐롤라인이 학생들을 지원하고 있었는데, 캐롤라인은 자신의 역

할을 “언어적, 문화적 요구가 높은” 학생들을 지원하는 것으로 여기고 있었

다. 한 교사는 학생들이 근처 교외에 살고 있지만 “도시 중심부로 들어오는

경우는 거의 없고 자신의 지역사회와 문화 밖으로 거의 나오지 않으려 한

다”고 했다.

애니마스크(AniMask) 인형극

라자스타니 도예(Rajasthani Potters)시각예술 - 도예

56

워카 장신구 프로그램은 10-12세 어린이(남아 13명, 여아 9명)와 이들의 교

사를 대상으로 4시간 워크숍을 3주의 간격을 두고 두 번 진행되었다. 칠레

출신 국제 예술가인 리카르도와 클로디아가 이끈 이 워크숍은 재활용 재료

를 사용하여 개별적으로 또한 그룹으로 장신구를 디자인하고 제작했는데,

사우스 키즈(South Kids) 프로젝트와 빅 드로우(Big Draw) 프로젝트 코디

네이터들의 지원을 받았다. 리카르도와 클로디아에 따르면 “아마도 다른

무엇보다도 아이들에게 매력적일” 유사한 디자인 프로세스에 아이들을 참

여시키는 것이 이 워크숍의 목표였다. 참가자들은 멜버른 외곽의 학교에서

온 학생들이었다. 한 교사는 이 학생들은 다양한 문화에 노출된 경험이 없

어 아트플레이에 오게 되었고, 시 정부가 협소해질 수 있는 기성 관점을 “타

파”하는 것을 돕고 있다고 했다.

이 워크숍은 젊은 호주 퍼포먼스 소묘 예술가 젠이 주도했다. 젠은 미술 학

위를 취득하고 최근에는 교사교육 학위를 획득했다. 정규직 교사가 되지는

못했는데 그 이유는 “미술 없이는 살 수 없기 때문”이라고 했다. 몇 주 간격

을 두고 이틀간 진행이 된 이 프로그램에서는 참가자들이 함께 대규모 그룹

목탄화를 완성해나가고 이 과정은 스톱 모션 촬영으로 기록이 되었다. 이와

동시에 학생들은 디지털 태블릿을 이용해 동료 참가자의 초상화를 그렸다.

아트플레이 빅 드로우 코디네이터는 이 워크숍도 지원했다.

3개의 초등학교에서 온 9-12세의 학생들이 참가했다. 연령대가 높은 아이

들은 이전에 아트플레이에 참가한 경험이 있었다. 교사 스테이시는 다음과

같은 이유로 학생들이 긍정적으로 활동에 임했다고 답했다.

방이 매우 커서 아이들에게 충분한 공간이 주어집니다. 뛰어다닐 수도 있고

주어진 시간에 두 개의 다른 활동을 번갈아 가면서 할 수 있습니다. 많이 어지

러뜨릴 수는 있지만 괜찮습니다. 아이들은 그 공간의 모든 환경을 즐깁니다.

워카 장신구(Walka Accessories) 시각예술

퍼포먼스 소묘(Performance Drawing)시각예술

57

본인을 숙련된 ‘교육 예술가’라고 표현한 린다가 이끄는 9-10세 아동 대상

프로그램으로, 4시간 워크숍을 2회 진행했다. 2명의 교사의 지원을 받아

학생들은 멜버른 외곽 초등학교에서 참가했다. 린다는 이 프로그램을 “혼

돈 놀이(chaotic play)”라고 소개하였고 아이들은 다양한 추상적인 그림들

을 그렸다. 일부는 음악과 움직임을 보고 그림을 그렸다. 두 번째 워크숍에

서 아이들은 근처 시립미술관에서 키네틱 아트 전시회를 관람했다. 이 워크

숍은 빅 드로우 프로젝트 코디네이터 그레그의 목표에 부합한다. 그레그는

제약이 없는 그리기를 통해 또한 예술 매체의 “물질성(materiality)”에 대한

탐구를 촉진하는 체험을 통해 학생들에게 “신체적” 참여 기회를 제공하는

것이 중요하다고 강조한다.

몇 주 간격으로 3일간 시행되는 이 프로그램에서 학생들은 개인 스케치북

을 작성하고, 자화상을 그리고 마지막으로 개별적으로 그린 그림과 그룹별

로 그린 그림을 모아 대규모 공동 그림을 완성한다. 참가학생들은 11-12세

의 남자 아이들이었고 두 명의 교사 패트리시아와 멜라니, 그리고 빅 드로

우 프로젝트 코디네이터가 도움을 주었다. 멜버른의 예술가인 마리안느는

소묘 기반 애니메이션에 관심을 가지게 된 미술가라고 본인을 소개했다. 그

녀는 이 워크숍의 목표는 “학생들의 그래픽 역량” 평가 보다는 “학생들의

인지 방식을 바꾸는 데” 있다고 했다.

참가자들은 멜버른 도심에 위치한 사립 남학교에 등록하였다. 교사 패트리시

아는 이 학교를 “운이 좋고 훌륭한 시설을 갖춘 곳” 이라고 평가했다. 이 학

교는 예술을 공부를 위한 풍부한 기회를 제공한다며 다음과 같이 덧붙였다.

여기에 오면 학생들은 소규모 그룹으로 전문 예술가와 보다 가까이서, 또 완

전히 다른 환경에서 작업하게 된다. 이는 매우 중요한 것이라고 생각한다.

빅 드로우(Big Draw): 소묘에서 음악으로 (Drawing to Music) 복합예술

빅 드로우(Big Draw): 초상화와 책 만들기(Portraits and Bookmaking) 시각예술

58

장기 프로그램(Longterm Programs)

3년 동안 일단의 7-13세 아동들이 켄과 레베카가 이끄는 아트플레이 인형극단이라 불리는 시각 연극/인형극 프로그램의 정기 참가자가 되었다. 각각의 연

간 프로그램에 13명까지 참여하였다. 이들은 4시간에서 6시간 가량 진행되는 5개의 워크숍에 참가했는데, 워크숍은 방학 기간에 몇 일 동안 연속적으로 진

행되거나 몇 주씩 떨어져 진행되기도 했다. 디렉터와 멘토의 역할을 한 켄과 레베카의 견습생으로 참여하면서 아이들은 “상자를 사랑한 남자(The Man who

Loved Boxes )”와 같은 전문적인 대중 공연의 대본을 공동으로 쓰고, 공동으로 제작하여 상연하였다. 이 프로그램의 핵심 목적은 “우리(예술가)가 작품을 만

들 때 겪을 과정을 아이들도 경험하게 하는 것”이라고 레베카는 말했다. 예술가들은 개방적이고 도전적인 ‘중요한(big)’ 주제를 탐구 대상으로 선정했고 이러

한 주제가 그림자 극 등을 통해 어떻게 발전될지 사전 계획을 세웠다. “상자를 사랑한 남자(The Man who Loved Boxes )” 워크숍에서 예술가들은 아이들이 ‘예상 밖의’ ‘자유분방하고’ ‘기발한’ 아이디어와 주제를 개발하도록 독려했다.

예술가와 작업한 경험에 대해 물어보면 어린 인형극 예술가들은 다음과 같은 대답을 했다. “생각해보고 집중을 해야 한다,” “[예술가들은] 마음속에 각인되도록,

무엇을 해야 할 지, 이해가 될 때까지 설명해주었다. 절대 화를 내지 않았다. 그저 ‘자, 이렇게 해보자’라고 했다.”

아트플레이 인형극단(ArtPlay Puppet Troupe) 시각연극/인형극

59

아트플레이 창작 프로듀서인 사이먼 스페인과 당시 멜버른 심포니오케스트라(MSO)의 교육담당이었던 음악가 길리안이 2004년에 시작한 프로그램으로, 매

해 새로운 그룹이 만들어진다. 이 앙상블 프로그램은 2일간 워크숍을 방학기간 동안 3개월 간격을 두고 3-4번 시행한다. 각 2일간 워크숍에는 아동 대상 현

멜버른 심포니 오케스트라(MSO) 콘서트 프로그램의 작품에서 영감을 받아 음악 작품 하나를 완성한다. 아동들의 공동 작품의 토대가 될 요소가 있다고 생

각되는 곡을 고른다. 첫날(오전 10시-오후 2시 30분)은 보통 멜버른 심포니 오케스트라(MSO)가 상주하는 ABC센터 이와키 강당에서 진행한다.

이틀 동안 소규모 그룹 작업과 전체 작업을 공동을 진행한다. 최종 작품을 여러 요소로 나누어 최대 6명으로 구성된 소 그룹을 만든다. 관여하는 멜버른 심포

니 오케스트라(MSO) 멤버, 아이들이 연주하는 악기와 전문성에 따라, 이 소 그룹들은 오케스트라에서 그룹을 나뉘는 것처럼 악기 종류별로 구성하기도 하

고 악기를 섞어서 구성하기도 한다. 길리안은 전체를 지도하거나 개별 그룹들을 지도하기도 하면서 적극적 지원과 조력을 아끼지 않는다. 그 다음날엔 아트

플레이로 장소를 이동하고 길리안은 음악감독 역할을 한다. 대부분의 시간은 점진적으로 서로 연결이 되고 화합이 되도록 각 파트를 발전시켜 복합 영역으

로 된 작품을 만들어나가는데, 그리고 가족 및 친구들 앞에서 최종 공연을 할 수 있도록 리허설을 하는 데 투자한다. 학생들은 몇 달 후에 다시 돌아와 멜버른

심포니 오케스트라(MSO) 프로그램의 다른 작곡가의 작품을 기반으로 또 다른 작품을 만든다.

음악가(전문가)들이 겪을 과정을 아이들이 경험하게끔 하려고 노력합니다. 아이들에게 (음악가들에게 하는 것과 같은) 과제와 질문을 던집니다. 아이들은 스스로

어떻게 작품을 만들지 생각하고 파악해갑니다. 그 과정 자체가 핵심이며, 추후 더 넓은 세계에 적용할 수 있습니다. 여기서 배운 기술, 그리고 문제해결은 창조적

이고 진실되다는 접근법을 취하는 데 이것이 중요합니다. 가장 빠르고 쉬운 해결책을 강요하는 것이 아니라, 무엇이 필요한 지, 무엇이 요구되는지, 무엇을 원하

는지를 찾아가려고 노력하는 것이며, 스스로 고군분투하며 음악가들이 분투하는 것을 알아갑니다. 이것이 내가 이 프로젝트에서 원하는 것입니다. 이것이야말로

앙상블의 예술성이라 생각합니다.

아트플레이 멜버른 심포니오케스트라 앙상블(ArtPlay Melbourne Symphony Orchestra Ensemble) 음악

Part 2.

키즈 오운 퍼블리싱

키즈 오운 퍼블리싱 소개

어린이 커뮤니티 퍼블리싱에 대하여

63

키즈 오운 퍼블리싱이 하는 일(WHAT)키즈 오운 퍼블리싱은 아이들이 쓰고 그린 글과 그림이 담긴 책을 출판합니다. 문해력 향상을 위해 다양한 지역사회의 어린이들과 가족들을 대상으로 한 프

로그램을 제공합니다.

어린이에 의한, 어린이를 위한 책을 출판하는 세계 최초의 어린이 전문 출판사로서, 우리는 이렇게 어린이 손으로 직접 제작한 책들이 다른 어린이들에게 미

치는 영향에 진정한 가치가 있다고 생각합니다.

어린이 가족 및 지역사회가 이러한 출판과정에 참여를 하게 되면 :

• 언어를 사용하는 경험이 늘고

• 성공적 언어능력 향상을 통해 책에 대한 애정을 가지게 되며

• 어린이와 학부모가 함께 글을 읽는 경험을 하게 해 줍니다.

※ 매해 키즈 오운 퍼블리싱은 어린이가 스스로 제작한 공식도서(ISBN번호부여) 20권 이상을 출판하고 있으며, 독자 수는 25,000명에 이릅니다.

키즈 오운 퍼블리싱 설립자(WHO)1997년 아일랜드에서, 2004년 호주에서 설립된 키즈 오운 퍼블리싱은 유사한 프로젝트로 유럽과 호주에서 활동하고 있는 사이먼 스페인(Simon Spain)과

빅토리아 라일(Victoria Ryle) 의 25년의 경험을 기반으로 성장해 왔습니다.

숫자로 본 키즈 오운 퍼블리싱

• 60개 이상의 조직과의 파트너쉽을 구축하였고

• 매해 5,000명 이상의 어린이 및 어른이 책 만들기 프로젝트에 참여하며

• 어린이가 스스로 제작한 100권 이상의 책을

• 호주 토착언어(Aboriginal languages)를 포함한 10개 이상의 언어로 출판하였습니다.

키즈 오운 퍼블리싱의 혁신적 프로젝트(KEY INNOVATIONS)• <키즈 오운 북 커비(The Kids’ Own Book Cubby)>: 어린이 작가와 삽화가의 작품을 전시한 이동식 도서관

• <북 팩토리(Book Factory)>: 전문작가, 삽화가 및 출판사의 지원 하에 어린이들에게 혁신적이고 창의적인 이야기 만들기 체험을 할 수 있도록 하는 이동식 맞춤 워크숍

• <위퍼블리시(WePublish)>: 디지털 기술을 이용하여 어린이들이 직접 그림책을 만들게 하는 iPad 용 신규 어플리케이션(wepublishapp.com)

키즈 오운 퍼블리싱의 주요 프로젝트(KEY PROJECTS)• <키즈 오운 스쿨즈 프로그램(Kids’ Own Schools Program)>: 호주 전역의 학교에 제공되는 종합 출판 프로그램

• <당나귀는 비행기를 탈 수 없어요(Donkeys Can’t Fly on Planes)>: 키즈 오운 퍼블리싱(Kids’ Own) 이 출판한 책으로서, 호주에 살고 있는 남수단 난민아

동의 25가지 이야기를 수록하고 있음

• <커뮤니티를 위한 레시피(A Recipe for Community)>: 서로 다른 능력을 가진 어린이 및 어른들이 예술가들과 함께 지역사회 차원에서 원활한 소통을 통

해 통합적인 사회를 이루고자 하는 프로그램

후원(SUPPORTERS)호주 예술위원회(Australia Council) 아츠 빅토리아(ArtsVic)

빅토리아 주 교육 초기유아발달부서(Department of Education and Early Childhood Development, DEECD)

빅토리아 주도서관 및 웨스턴 오스트레일리아 주도서관

멜버른(Melbourne), 절롱(Geelong), 카르디니아 샤이어(Cardinia Shire)시정부

기타 다수의 자선단체

키즈 오운 퍼블리싱 (Kids’ Own Publishing)

64

키즈 오운 퍼블리싱에서의 출판(Publishing)이란 무엇을 말하는지요?우리가 말하는 출판이란 이야기가 여러 사람들과 공유될 수 있다는 것을 의미합니다. 글과 그림의 복사

본이 많은 이들에게 전달되는 것이지요. 출판이란 아이디어가 세계로 전달되어 발전되도록 하는 마술

과 같은 역할을 합니다.

어린이 커뮤니티 퍼블리싱이란 무엇인지요?1. 어린이의, 어린이에 의한, 어린이를 위한 지역사회의 협동적 책 만들기 과정입니다.

2. 어린이 커뮤니티 퍼블리싱은 어린이에게 책을 만들 수 있는 기회를 제공함과 동시에 언어능력을 향상시킵니다.

3. 어린이들의 목소리를 통해서 지역사회의 문화, 언어 및 공통적 경험에 대해 한번 더 생각할 수 있게 합니다.

출판에 왜 어린이를 관여시키는지요?1. 어린이들, 특히 소외아동들은 그들이 접하는 책 속에 반영된 그들의 모습, 그들의 문화 및 그들의 언어를 바라볼 필요가 있습니다.

2. 자신이 만든 책이 출판되고 넓은 계층에게 전달되는 과정을 보며 어린이들은 자신의 글과 그림의 위상이 높아지는 것을 보게 되고, 자신감, 자존감을 키우게 됩니다.

3. 어린이의 손으로 만들어진 책은 지역사회 간 연결고리의 역할을 합니다.

키즈 오운 퍼블리싱의 철학은 무엇인지요?1. 어린이들과 가족 구성원들이 예술가와 함께 책의 내용을 민주적으로 구성해 나가는 것

2. 모임, 유치원, 학교, 도서관 등 지역사회에서의 어린이와 가족 구성원들 모두를 존중하는 것

3. 주어진 시간과 공간 안에서의 창조적 에너지를 추구하며, 책을 만드는 과정에 있어서의 완벽함(perfection)을 기하지 않는 것

한 가지 아이디어가 출판으로 이어지는 과정이 어떻게 이루어지나요?1. 먼저 지역사회에 이미 존재하는 문화적ㆍ창의적 자본(the cultural and creative capital)을 파악합니다.

2. 다룰 수 있는 기법(technique)을 파악합니다. 본인이 가지고 있는 기술(skill)과 출판에 필요한 기술을 잘 파악해야 합니다. 책을 인쇄하고, 출판하

는 과정에서는 많은 기술이 필요한데요, 처음 시작할 때는 작고 단순하게 시작하는 것이 좋습니다(Start small and simple). 자세한 내용은 www.

kidsownpublishing.com를 통해 확인할 수 있습니다.

3. 글을 쓰고 그림을 그린 어린이에게 결정권을 주고 섬세하게 지침을 줍니다. 때로는 뒤에서 묵묵히 지켜보면서 이들에게 힘을 줍니다.

어린이 커뮤니티 퍼블리싱(Children’s Community Publishing)에 대하여

www.kidsownpublishing.com ©Kids’ Own Publishing (Australia)

Children’s Community Publishing: FAQs First, what do we mean by publishing?

Publishing means a story can be shared with many. Publishing is the opportunity to make beautiful copies of words and illustrations. Publishing is the magic that takes an idea, hands it out to the world and allows it to grow. What is children’s community publishing?

1. It is publishing books by children, with children, for children and their significant adults, collaboratively in communities

2. It is an opportunity for children to create published books with their community that will also support their literacy development.

3. It enables communities to celebrate their culture, languages and experience through the voices of their children.

Why get children involved in publishing?

1. Children, particularly those experiencing disadvantage, need to see themselves, their culture and their languages reflected in the books they encounter.

2. Publishing raises the status of children’s words and images, and builds their confidence and self esteem by reaching out to a wider audience.

3. Books created by children can bridge divides within, across and between communities.

What is the philosophy of Kids' Own Publishing (a.k.a. the Kids' Own Way)?

1. It is a democratic process of developing content for a book collaboratively with a group of children and their significant adults, alongside an artist.

2. It is respectful of children and their adults, across all communities, in all contexts where children and families are present such as playgroups, kindergartens, schools, libraries and other agencies

3. It celebrates the creative energy of a group in a given time and place (and budget!) – it is not about perfection.

How does a group get from idea to book?

1. Start by identifying the cultural and creative capital that already exists in your community: children, families, artists, designers, cultural organisations…

2. Identify a technique that is manageable: that matches your skills and your access to the technology needed to publish. There are many techniques for making a book, printing and publishing it. Start small and simple. Kids’ Own Publishing can help you at www.kidsownpublishing.com.

3. Empower the author/illustrators by giving them the control over decisions, guiding sensitively and standing back where possible.

ArtPlay

ArtPlay

Part 0.

Introducing the Instructors

Part 1.

Behind ArtPlay’s Bright Orange Door

3

6

11

13

15

17

30

31

37

40

Summary of the research

What is ArtPlay?

Engagement

Learning

Cultural citizenship

Engaging practice

Conclusion

About the research

Bibliography

Appendix

Contents

2

Mapping and augmenting engagement, learning and cultural citizenship for children through ArtPlay workshops with artists.

73

3

6

11

13

15

17

30

31

37

40

Summary of the research

What is ArtPlay?

Engagement

Learning

Cultural citizenship

Engaging practice

Conclusion

About the research

Bibliography

Appendix

Contents

2


74

77

82

84

86

88

101

102

108

111

74

ArtPlay is a unique arts provider for children in Australia and draws its inspiration from The Ark in Dublin. It represents a permanent home for children’s art and play, and makes an important non-school contribution to the artistic, creative and cultural development of the City of Melbourne as a child-friendly city. Open to children aged 3-13 years, the facility offers a wide range of artist-led programs across diverse art forms and age groups, and its establishment in 2004 showed a significant commitment by the City of Melbourne to the promotion of arts and cultural experiences for children and families. This report is the result of research conducted between 2007 – 2012 that involved:

691 children

300 parents

63 artists

20 ArtPlay staff

4 City of Melbourne staff

8 researchers

39 workshops

366 surveys

3

When we sat down it was so subtle. At first, I wondered what is really happening here? Is my child going to be engaged, because she’s never one to sit at storytime. Then after ten or fifteen minutes it seemed like magic. All the kids were involved and the artists just seemed to know exactly what and when to present to the children. It was all so seamless. They managed to get a level of engagement and intense interest with all the children without saying what to do, or giving out things. They just presented stuff for the children to take themselves when they felt that they wanted to.

ArtPlay parent


4

children and parents – are engaged by the practical arts workshops

parents – seek out of school arts experiences for their children– seek experiences that are open, playful and creative– value the arts experiences offered – value the welcoming and supportive environment– take home ideas for further arts activities – value the opportunities to play alongside their children– value the opportunities to co-create with their children– value observing how their children interact and respond in a public space

artists– model their own artistic practice and creative processes– create workshops that are openly planned and responsive to child interests and emotional needs– are adept at multimodel communication– rarely work alone– adopt a variety of roles – facilitator, model, director, engagement monitor– engage children through personal and professional connections– commonly work across disciplines– support the concept of ‘learning to learn’ capacities such as self-efficacy, communication, collaboration, problem-solving and risk-taking– guide parents’ participation towards child-led learning

children and artists– build relationships through co-playing and cocreating

ArtPlay has:– a unique combination of time, environment/space, artists and participants– a welcoming and supportive staff– a safe, practical and aesthetic environment conducive to creative expression, and– organisational goals and values that support creative enquiry by children

At ArtPlay– there is consultation with children, families and artists– there is built-in, paid time for artist reflection and evaluation– there is regular professional development for artists– there are opportunities for artists to extend themselves

children– enjoy making and ‘doing’– value using cognitively rich tools and materials– develop confidence to initiate and direct their own art-making– are challenged to try ‘something different’ – engage in creative and collaborative learning processes– build cultural citizenship– build relationships with other children– learn through personalised art making– learn something new– learn arts skills and knowledge– have shared and individual experiences– develop individual risk-taking, collaboration and communication skills and self-efficacy– are engaged by activities that are paced, unhurried, varied and linked– are engaged by a custom designed environment


75

ArtPlay is a unique arts provider for children in Australia and draws its inspiration from The Ark in Dublin. It represents a permanent home for children’s art and play, and makes an important non-school contribution to the artistic, creative and cultural development of the City of Melbourne as a child-friendly city. Open to children aged 3-13 years, the facility offers a wide range of artist-led programs across diverse art forms and age groups, and its establishment in 2004 showed a significant commitment by the City of Melbourne to the promotion of arts and cultural experiences for children and families. This report is the result of research conducted between 2007 – 2012 that involved:

691 children

300 parents

63 artists

20 ArtPlay staff

4 City of Melbourne staff

8 researchers

39 workshops

366 surveys

3

When we sat down it was so subtle. At first, I wondered what is really happening here? Is my child going to be engaged, because she’s never one to sit at storytime. Then after ten or fifteen minutes it seemed like magic. All the kids were involved and the artists just seemed to know exactly what and when to present to the children. It was all so seamless. They managed to get a level of engagement and intense interest with all the children without saying what to do, or giving out things. They just presented stuff for the children to take themselves when they felt that they wanted to.

ArtPlay parent


4

children and parents – are engaged by the practical arts workshops

parents – seek out of school arts experiences for their children– seek experiences that are open, playful and creative– value the arts experiences offered – value the welcoming and supportive environment– take home ideas for further arts activities – value the opportunities to play alongside their children– value the opportunities to co-create with their children– value observing how their children interact and respond in a public space

artists– model their own artistic practice and creative processes– create workshops that are openly planned and responsive to child interests and emotional needs– are adept at multimodel communication– rarely work alone– adopt a variety of roles – facilitator, model, director, engagement monitor– engage children through personal and professional connections– commonly work across disciplines– support the concept of ‘learning to learn’ capacities such as self-efficacy, communication, collaboration, problem-solving and risk-taking– guide parents’ participation towards child-led learning

children and artists– build relationships through co-playing and cocreating

ArtPlay has:– a unique combination of time, environment/space, artists and participants– a welcoming and supportive staff– a safe, practical and aesthetic environment conducive to creative expression, and– organisational goals and values that support creative enquiry by children

At ArtPlay– there is consultation with children, families and artists– there is built-in, paid time for artist reflection and evaluation– there is regular professional development for artists– there are opportunities for artists to extend themselves

children– enjoy making and ‘doing’– value using cognitively rich tools and materials– develop confidence to initiate and direct their own art-making– are challenged to try ‘something different’ – engage in creative and collaborative learning processes– build cultural citizenship– build relationships with other children– learn through personalised art making– learn something new– learn arts skills and knowledge– have shared and individual experiences– develop individual risk-taking, collaboration and communication skills and self-efficacy– are engaged by activities that are paced, unhurried, varied and linked– are engaged by a custom designed environment


765

What is ArtPlay?

During a once-only period of major city development, the central train yards of Melbourne were transformed into what is now a vibrant community and cultural precinct. At this site was a dilapidated railway building awaiting demolition. Through the vision of a group of like-minded town planners, local government councillors and arts and cultural leaders, the idea evolved to develop such a site into a dedicated facility for children and families, a place to congregate and create through the arts. And so ArtPlay was born.

Seemingly as a by-product of Federation Square, a new and significant public space, the opportunity arose to develop a new park in a prime river location in the centre of Melbourne. At this time, the town planners were aware that life in the city was changing, and Rob Adams1 commented,

… one of the challenges that Melbourne faced going back to the early ‘80s was to turn itself from being a central business district into a central activity centre, and effectively, that’s what’s happened… if you read today’s The Age [newspaper]

all of those figures are talking about a city that has gone from being an 8 to 5 city, to being a place where people live and spend a lot more of their time, and the residential population in the central city has gone from about 800 units to about 16,000 in that short period.

Part of the drive for this city transformation was the increasing child and family population. Morris Bellamy2

recalled that, “The city was looking for a new strategy”, one that led planners to “consider seriously, for the first time, the notion of a child friendly city”. He added that the development of a park and community art space in a “prime” location along the river was “not accidental”, and that it formed part of a “vision for children and families to have a deeper engagement with the city… a different experience from just shopping and buying.”

At some stage the idea of developing a derelict building into a community arts space germinated. This was partly stimulated by strong advocates, Rob Adams and later Councillor Wilson, who both remembered feeling

1. Rob Adams is an architect and urban designer, and Director of City Design at the City of Melbourne.2. Morris Bellamy is the former Manager of the City of Melbourne’s Arts and Culture section.

6

775

What is ArtPlay?

During a once-only period of major city development, the central train yards of Melbourne were transformed into what is now a vibrant community and cultural precinct. At this site was a dilapidated railway building awaiting demolition. Through the vision of a group of like-minded town planners, local government councillors and arts and cultural leaders, the idea evolved to develop such a site into a dedicated facility for children and families, a place to congregate and create through the arts. And so ArtPlay was born.

Seemingly as a by-product of Federation Square, a new and significant public space, the opportunity arose to develop a new park in a prime river location in the centre of Melbourne. At this time, the town planners were aware that life in the city was changing, and Rob Adams1 commented,

… one of the challenges that Melbourne faced going back to the early ‘80s was to turn itself from being a central business district into a central activity centre, and effectively, that’s what’s happened… if you read today’s The Age [newspaper]

all of those figures are talking about a city that has gone from being an 8 to 5 city, to being a place where people live and spend a lot more of their time, and the residential population in the central city has gone from about 800 units to about 16,000 in that short period.

Part of the drive for this city transformation was the increasing child and family population. Morris Bellamy2

recalled that, “The city was looking for a new strategy”, one that led planners to “consider seriously, for the first time, the notion of a child friendly city”. He added that the development of a park and community art space in a “prime” location along the river was “not accidental”, and that it formed part of a “vision for children and families to have a deeper engagement with the city… a different experience from just shopping and buying.”

At some stage the idea of developing a derelict building into a community arts space germinated. This was partly stimulated by strong advocates, Rob Adams and later Councillor Wilson, who both remembered feeling

1. Rob Adams is an architect and urban designer, and Director of City Design at the City of Melbourne.2. Morris Bellamy is the former Manager of the City of Melbourne’s Arts and Culture section.

6

78

restricted from undertaking arts studies in formal education when they were young, and strongly believed that children should be given more opportunities to “express their ideas” and to be “creative”. While the seed of an idea for what was to become ArtPlay had been planted, it wasn’t formally considered until Rob Adams saw a unique children’s art centre in Dublin, Ireland, that the concept for ArtPlay took shape; “I saw in the ARK an idea that resonated with me… young kids working with professional artists in their own facility”. Central to the mission of The Ark is an image of the ‘citizen child’, a position developed in response to Article 31 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, which promotes the need to, “respect and promote the right of the child to participate fully in cultural and artistic life and encourage the provision of appropriate and equal opportunities for cultural, artistic, recreational and leisure activity” (United Nations, 1989: 9). This belief aligned strongly with the City of Melbourne’s aspiration to promote further social engagement with children and families.

Planners now had both a vision and working model for ArtPlay. They had also identified and were to eventually recruit a creative producer for ArtPlay, Simon Spain, one of the core artists at The Ark. Rather than employ an arts administrator, key people such as Rob Adams preferred to employ an artist experienced with working with children,

Artists are undervalued for their creative management skills and the effort they put into their work… Just about every project (as an urban planner) involves an artist. This is threatening for some people but exciting for others who want to ‘think outside the box’.

This complex and timely convergence of events and developments, as noted by Morris Bellamy, was the catalyst for the creation of ArtPlay with the belief that it could be “striking example of how Melbourne could embody the idea of a child friendly city” and “offer something to children at a different level, something deep and memorable.”

Supporters of ArtPlay had faith in its capacity to find its own form through the Creative Producer’s leadership and provide engaging arts programs for children aged three to thirteen years. After several business plan iterations, the Council agreed to fund ArtPlay for three years with significant support from the Myer Foundation. It was accepted that it needed to be nurtured by an ‘arms-length’ approach, giving it every opportunity to succeed on its own terms. Entrusted with the license to experiment, the beginnings of programming were opportunistic and developed, where possible, in partnership with existing festivals and established artist-in-residence initiatives. And in 2012 ArtPlay is now core business for the Council.

The OrganisationShepherded in by an ArtPlay staff member, the children and families move from a small foyer to an expansive, open and un-cluttered hall brightly lit by large windows placed high adjacent to the exposed vaulted ceiling. This first exchange between ArtPlay personnel and the community begins to establish trust and rapport, alleviating the uncertainties of new users. After a short period of time most participants are readily engaged and un-distracted by life outside ArtPlay.

As an artist himself The Creative Producer had a clear vision for artist-led programs. Families feel welcomed by the front of house and other ArtPlay staff who interact with them before, during and following the workshops, a service that includes making parents themselves feel confident in their own creative abilities. Such support complements the creative role of the artist in a variety of ways. Alex, the ArtPlay Program Coordinator, observed that the staff act as ‘conduits’, and help participants to ‘interpret’ the workshop content. They also, according to Bobby3, take on the role of ‘hosts’ and also ‘mediate’ between the artist and the children, particularly if the artist is inexperienced in working with children. The staff employed to take on these roles do not have specific training, though many have worked with children before. As Bobby says, “To tell you the truth, they haven’t (had training), but they all have a special quality which is patience, love for children, and love for art”.

3. Bobby is the ArtPlay front-of-house Coordinator

7

The spaceThe physical space is made up of an open downstairs hall suitable for diverse activities ranging from dance and music performances to large-scale visual arts installations. Adjacent to this space is a smaller area that can be completely enclosed and blacked out. It can transform into a seminar space, a gallery and/or a more intimate space for art-making. Located upstairs is a mezzanine area that provides a smaller workshop space suitable for more contained arts

experiences. The whole building benefits from abundant natural light streaming through high tall windows located on all four walls. Designed as an open modular space the environment is continually custom-designed for the needs of each age group and art program, helping to create an atmosphere of focused attention and home-like comfort. This capacity to transform creates a perpetual ‘newness’ for how participants experience ArtPlay.

8

79

restricted from undertaking arts studies in formal education when they were young, and strongly believed that children should be given more opportunities to “express their ideas” and to be “creative”. While the seed of an idea for what was to become ArtPlay had been planted, it wasn’t formally considered until Rob Adams saw a unique children’s art centre in Dublin, Ireland, that the concept for ArtPlay took shape; “I saw in the ARK an idea that resonated with me… young kids working with professional artists in their own facility”. Central to the mission of The Ark is an image of the ‘citizen child’, a position developed in response to Article 31 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, which promotes the need to, “respect and promote the right of the child to participate fully in cultural and artistic life and encourage the provision of appropriate and equal opportunities for cultural, artistic, recreational and leisure activity” (United Nations, 1989: 9). This belief aligned strongly with the City of Melbourne’s aspiration to promote further social engagement with children and families.

Planners now had both a vision and working model for ArtPlay. They had also identified and were to eventually recruit a creative producer for ArtPlay, Simon Spain, one of the core artists at The Ark. Rather than employ an arts administrator, key people such as Rob Adams preferred to employ an artist experienced with working with children,

Artists are undervalued for their creative management skills and the effort they put into their work… Just about every project (as an urban planner) involves an artist. This is threatening for some people but exciting for others who want to ‘think outside the box’.

This complex and timely convergence of events and developments, as noted by Morris Bellamy, was the catalyst for the creation of ArtPlay with the belief that it could be “striking example of how Melbourne could embody the idea of a child friendly city” and “offer something to children at a different level, something deep and memorable.”

Supporters of ArtPlay had faith in its capacity to find its own form through the Creative Producer’s leadership and provide engaging arts programs for children aged three to thirteen years. After several business plan iterations, the Council agreed to fund ArtPlay for three years with significant support from the Myer Foundation. It was accepted that it needed to be nurtured by an ‘arms-length’ approach, giving it every opportunity to succeed on its own terms. Entrusted with the license to experiment, the beginnings of programming were opportunistic and developed, where possible, in partnership with existing festivals and established artist-in-residence initiatives. And in 2012 ArtPlay is now core business for the Council.

The OrganisationShepherded in by an ArtPlay staff member, the children and families move from a small foyer to an expansive, open and un-cluttered hall brightly lit by large windows placed high adjacent to the exposed vaulted ceiling. This first exchange between ArtPlay personnel and the community begins to establish trust and rapport, alleviating the uncertainties of new users. After a short period of time most participants are readily engaged and un-distracted by life outside ArtPlay.

As an artist himself The Creative Producer had a clear vision for artist-led programs. Families feel welcomed by the front of house and other ArtPlay staff who interact with them before, during and following the workshops, a service that includes making parents themselves feel confident in their own creative abilities. Such support complements the creative role of the artist in a variety of ways. Alex, the ArtPlay Program Coordinator, observed that the staff act as ‘conduits’, and help participants to ‘interpret’ the workshop content. They also, according to Bobby3, take on the role of ‘hosts’ and also ‘mediate’ between the artist and the children, particularly if the artist is inexperienced in working with children. The staff employed to take on these roles do not have specific training, though many have worked with children before. As Bobby says, “To tell you the truth, they haven’t (had training), but they all have a special quality which is patience, love for children, and love for art”.

3. Bobby is the ArtPlay front-of-house Coordinator

7

The spaceThe physical space is made up of an open downstairs hall suitable for diverse activities ranging from dance and music performances to large-scale visual arts installations. Adjacent to this space is a smaller area that can be completely enclosed and blacked out. It can transform into a seminar space, a gallery and/or a more intimate space for art-making. Located upstairs is a mezzanine area that provides a smaller workshop space suitable for more contained arts

experiences. The whole building benefits from abundant natural light streaming through high tall windows located on all four walls. Designed as an open modular space the environment is continually custom-designed for the needs of each age group and art program, helping to create an atmosphere of focused attention and home-like comfort. This capacity to transform creates a perpetual ‘newness’ for how participants experience ArtPlay.

8

80

The programIn the midst of a groundswell of individual child music making, Nico introduces more instruments, including enough angklungs for every child. At this point the atmosphere becomes even freer with children moving around to collect instruments, adults and children co-playing and Nico moving throughout modelling one-to-one how to play various instruments. As one parent noted the artists were “warm, engaging, gentle and non-confrontational. They ensured that each child had a chance to be involved”. Meanwhile a mother plays a triangle to engage her baby who sits on her lap, and all the time Martin maintains a unifying bass beat in the background.

The workshops are mostly one-off or short term and cater for different age groups. The pre-school programs are for children aged three to five years. These are for 45 minutes to one hour and involve up to 20 children as well as parents and guardians, who are required to attend and participate. The programs for six to thirteen year olds are generally one-off and run for two-three hours with some continuing all day. Group numbers range widely from five to twenty-five young participants and parent/guardians are required to attend if their child is younger than eight years. Generally adults are not required to participate. The school programs involve up to twenty-five students who come with teachers to participate in a series of two or three whole-day workshops. There are also long term programs. These involve one group of young people (ranging from eight-thirteen years of age) who are engaged in multiple all day workshops (four to eight sessions). At this point such programs have only focused on music and visual theatre/puppetry.

The workshops are presented in an informal and relaxed manner with little sense of the pressures of time. Workshops end in different ways, sometimes culminating in a presentation/performance or final reflection, at other times, quietly finishing as individuals each complete their work. What is noticeable is that the boundaries of time and place are somewhat absent at ArtPlay – once there and cacooned, the children, artists and families are focused on the task at hand.

Participants

artists

children

parents

teachers

Duration

one-off

short-term sequences (2/3 sessions)

long-term (1 term - 1 year)

Type of workshop

public booked

school booked

drop-in

Artform

music

visual, plastic arts & craft

drama & theatre

dance

multi-form

new media

ArtPlayProgram

dimensions

Figure 1: The multiple dimensions of ArtPlay

9 10

The artistsFrom the outset the artists were conceptualised as the key figures in creating the program. After the first year of operation a core group of regular artists had formed. Apart from leading a number of workshops, some of these artists were eventually employed to co-develop program strands the preschool, school and puppetry workshops. Balanced with this stable of continuing artists has been the periodic or one-off employment of a very diverse group of artists.

While families frequently acknowledge the benefit of the arts for their children, the opportunities, resources and skills to engage children in arts experiences can be lacking. In response to this demand facilities such as The Ark and ArtPlay have emerged. As Bobby says,

I think for a lot of people it’s oh, let’s give this a try. But then I think what keeps bringing them back is the feeling of the place, the building itself, the staff, how friendly and welcoming we all are. How professional it is. The atmosphere that’s created by all those things, the building, the set up, but also the variety and working alongside an actual artist…

The development of ArtPlay outlined in this report shows that it is able to achieve what key advocates such as Councillor David Wilson had hoped, namely to “help kids engage with culture, with the city, with their families and with each other”.

Children’s Voices Once successfully established the Council extended its commitment to the facility by funding an annual round of ArtPlay grants ($100,000). A grants panel was formed, one that gave children full voting rights. One such panel we observed in 2007 included children aged seven to ten years, each partnered with a known adult (parent, guardian or family friend), artists, a representative from the Myer Foundation, and the Creative Producer of ArtPlay. Allocated the entire day to do so, the panel’s role was to systematically work through artist submissions, discuss the merits of each, and rate these in order of preference. It was a complex process that required communication, justification, prioritization and re-prioritization that took into account the merits of each subsequent application.

Through the grants program ArtPlay was able to attract diverse artists, both experienced with, and new to, working with children. Funded initially for a small number of workshops only, such grants allowed ArtPlay to trial innovative workshops that otherwise may not have been offered because of cost, or the risk of not gaining sufficient public subscription. A significant element of some grant proposals was that they targeted the participation of marginalised groups.

From the outset ArtPlay was offering free and inexpensive fee-based workshops but not necessarily attracting disadvantaged families, ones who were unaccustomed to coming into the city or disinclined due to travel costs. The opportunity to actively engage children from diverse backgrounds was given a boost through the support of a silent philanthropic organisation. Drawing from this funding, ArtPlay was able to support the workshop costs and travel of individuals and school groups identified as disadvantaged. In particular, this grant enabled and compelled the ArtPlay school program to extend beyond connections made in central Melbourne to other urban and regional schools, ones who rarely come to the city.

Overtime ArtPlay has continued to gain financial and other support from a range of sources and partnerships which has extended its capacity and reach. In 2012 it presented over 450 events, programs and workshops, including 50 days of low-cost or free school workshops.

The Research PartnershipThe distinctive combination of artistic, developmental and cultural elements housed at ArtPlay where children, parents and teachers are able to engage directly with artists and art-making in a non-school environment, has provided a unique research opportunity. ArtPlay is open and receptive environment, rightly identified as a ‘rich site’ for research (Davis, 2008).

Soon after the facility opened, communications between the City of Melbourne and the University of Melbourne were established with the goal of researching the phenomena of ArtPlay. This partnership, with support from the Australian Research Council and the Australia Council for the Arts, led to the four-year research project, Mapping and augmenting engagement, learning and cultural citizenship for children through ArtPlay workshops with artists. The research began in July 2007 and has provided an opportunity not previously available in Australia - to conduct sustained and in-depth research within a space specifically designed for art and play experiences for children aged three -thirteen. Throughout this research partnership we have actively sought the views of all those involved at ArtPlay and our formative analyses have stimulated on-going reflection, interrogation and exchange which has strengthened the organisation’s capacity to target, broaden and deepen the programs.

81

The programIn the midst of a groundswell of individual child music making, Nico introduces more instruments, including enough angklungs for every child. At this point the atmosphere becomes even freer with children moving around to collect instruments, adults and children co-playing and Nico moving throughout modelling one-to-one how to play various instruments. As one parent noted the artists were “warm, engaging, gentle and non-confrontational. They ensured that each child had a chance to be involved”. Meanwhile a mother plays a triangle to engage her baby who sits on her lap, and all the time Martin maintains a unifying bass beat in the background.

The workshops are mostly one-off or short term and cater for different age groups. The pre-school programs are for children aged three to five years. These are for 45 minutes to one hour and involve up to 20 children as well as parents and guardians, who are required to attend and participate. The programs for six to thirteen year olds are generally one-off and run for two-three hours with some continuing all day. Group numbers range widely from five to twenty-five young participants and parent/guardians are required to attend if their child is younger than eight years. Generally adults are not required to participate. The school programs involve up to twenty-five students who come with teachers to participate in a series of two or three whole-day workshops. There are also long term programs. These involve one group of young people (ranging from eight-thirteen years of age) who are engaged in multiple all day workshops (four to eight sessions). At this point such programs have only focused on music and visual theatre/puppetry.

The workshops are presented in an informal and relaxed manner with little sense of the pressures of time. Workshops end in different ways, sometimes culminating in a presentation/performance or final reflection, at other times, quietly finishing as individuals each complete their work. What is noticeable is that the boundaries of time and place are somewhat absent at ArtPlay – once there and cacooned, the children, artists and families are focused on the task at hand.

Participants

artists

children

parents

teachers

Duration

one-off

short-term sequences (2/3 sessions)

long-term (1 term - 1 year)

Type of workshop

public booked

school booked

drop-in

Artform

music

visual, plastic arts & craft

drama & theatre

dance

multi-form

new media

ArtPlayProgram

dimensions

Figure 1: The multiple dimensions of ArtPlay

9 10

The artistsFrom the outset the artists were conceptualised as the key figures in creating the program. After the first year of operation a core group of regular artists had formed. Apart from leading a number of workshops, some of these artists were eventually employed to co-develop program strands the preschool, school and puppetry workshops. Balanced with this stable of continuing artists has been the periodic or one-off employment of a very diverse group of artists.

While families frequently acknowledge the benefit of the arts for their children, the opportunities, resources and skills to engage children in arts experiences can be lacking. In response to this demand facilities such as The Ark and ArtPlay have emerged. As Bobby says,

I think for a lot of people it’s oh, let’s give this a try. But then I think what keeps bringing them back is the feeling of the place, the building itself, the staff, how friendly and welcoming we all are. How professional it is. The atmosphere that’s created by all those things, the building, the set up, but also the variety and working alongside an actual artist…

The development of ArtPlay outlined in this report shows that it is able to achieve what key advocates such as Councillor David Wilson had hoped, namely to “help kids engage with culture, with the city, with their families and with each other”.

Children’s Voices Once successfully established the Council extended its commitment to the facility by funding an annual round of ArtPlay grants ($100,000). A grants panel was formed, one that gave children full voting rights. One such panel we observed in 2007 included children aged seven to ten years, each partnered with a known adult (parent, guardian or family friend), artists, a representative from the Myer Foundation, and the Creative Producer of ArtPlay. Allocated the entire day to do so, the panel’s role was to systematically work through artist submissions, discuss the merits of each, and rate these in order of preference. It was a complex process that required communication, justification, prioritization and re-prioritization that took into account the merits of each subsequent application.

Through the grants program ArtPlay was able to attract diverse artists, both experienced with, and new to, working with children. Funded initially for a small number of workshops only, such grants allowed ArtPlay to trial innovative workshops that otherwise may not have been offered because of cost, or the risk of not gaining sufficient public subscription. A significant element of some grant proposals was that they targeted the participation of marginalised groups.

From the outset ArtPlay was offering free and inexpensive fee-based workshops but not necessarily attracting disadvantaged families, ones who were unaccustomed to coming into the city or disinclined due to travel costs. The opportunity to actively engage children from diverse backgrounds was given a boost through the support of a silent philanthropic organisation. Drawing from this funding, ArtPlay was able to support the workshop costs and travel of individuals and school groups identified as disadvantaged. In particular, this grant enabled and compelled the ArtPlay school program to extend beyond connections made in central Melbourne to other urban and regional schools, ones who rarely come to the city.

Overtime ArtPlay has continued to gain financial and other support from a range of sources and partnerships which has extended its capacity and reach. In 2012 it presented over 450 events, programs and workshops, including 50 days of low-cost or free school workshops.

The Research PartnershipThe distinctive combination of artistic, developmental and cultural elements housed at ArtPlay where children, parents and teachers are able to engage directly with artists and art-making in a non-school environment, has provided a unique research opportunity. ArtPlay is open and receptive environment, rightly identified as a ‘rich site’ for research (Davis, 2008).

Soon after the facility opened, communications between the City of Melbourne and the University of Melbourne were established with the goal of researching the phenomena of ArtPlay. This partnership, with support from the Australian Research Council and the Australia Council for the Arts, led to the four-year research project, Mapping and augmenting engagement, learning and cultural citizenship for children through ArtPlay workshops with artists. The research began in July 2007 and has provided an opportunity not previously available in Australia - to conduct sustained and in-depth research within a space specifically designed for art and play experiences for children aged three -thirteen. Throughout this research partnership we have actively sought the views of all those involved at ArtPlay and our formative analyses have stimulated on-going reflection, interrogation and exchange which has strengthened the organisation’s capacity to target, broaden and deepen the programs.

82

engagement

The families who come to ArtPlay are largely well-educated professionals who live in the inner Melbourne suburbs. While the families primarily speak English as their first language, they also represent diverse cultural backgrounds with 23% of families speaking a language other than English (Figure 2). This profile of family backgrounds, however, does not take account of the large number of participants who come to ArtPlay as part of free and large festival events and it should be noted that the school programs give emphasis to children from disadvantaged and marginalized communities.

Families bring their children to ArtPlay for a wide range of reasons such as the desire to expose their children to a ‘different’ experience, and an experience that promotes creativity and enjoyment (Figure 3). Families also look for workshops that relate to their child’s interests in the arts. The opportunity to work with artists was a significant reason for coming to ArtPlay for children aged eight and above in the school and long-term programs, but not for parents who came with young children. Another incentive noted by returning families was the welcoming and supportive staff, and the safe, practical and aesthetic qualities of the environment.

Greek 2%

Hindi 2%

Indonesian 2%

Italian 2%

Matjos Andjela 2%

Mandarin, Indonesian & Korean 2%

Other 12%

Unspecified13%

Turkish9%

SwissGerman

6%Spanish

4%

Japanese6%

Hebrew4%

Greek/Italian6%

German9%

Cantonese4%

Russian 4%

Romanian 4%

Mandarin, French& Polish 4%

Mandarin 6%

Korean 9%

Figure 3: Responses to Why did you come to ArtPlay today? (N=310)

Figure 2: Languages other than English spoken by families (N=155)

Making & Doing

Social Relations

Play, enjoyment, fyn

Creativity

Something different

Confidence

Ideas for home

Groupwork

New, different experience

Creativity

Play, enjoyment & fun

Working with the artist

Child interest in art

Environment

Social Relations

ArtPlay staff

Making & doing

Educational, learning

Time filler - holiday program

0

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

10 20 30 40 6050

11 12

Of the children surveyed (273), 92% said they enjoyed the workshops and 98% of their parents (93) agreed. The children made strong links between their enjoyment and the active making and doing (36%), and they valued using tools and materials, and creating a finished product. A small number of children (10%), particularly the older children, felt that working with artists and interacting socially with other children were the most memorable part of the workshops. Another group (8%) felt play was most important aspect. These positive reflections by children on their experiences at ArtPlay were strongly supported by other data from the observations and the artist interviews.

Workshop observations, informed by an engagement checklist (Table 1, p 32), indicated high levels of motivated, focused

and sustained participation. As well as the positive data, there were a small number of cases where children were not engaged, often as a result of their particular physical and emotional needs. Short periods of non-disruptive, child-determined, non-participation or ‘time out’, were not considered non-engagement but rather potentially positive opportunities for child reflection and re-charge.

Although children’s engagement was the primary focus of the study, high levels of parent engagement were also identified, particularly in the preschool programs. Parents in the focus groups discussed how positive it was to co-play and observe how their children interacted with others and such shared experiences also stimulated continued art and play experiences at home.

83

engagement

The families who come to ArtPlay are largely well-educated professionals who live in the inner Melbourne suburbs. While the families primarily speak English as their first language, they also represent diverse cultural backgrounds with 23% of families speaking a language other than English (Figure 2). This profile of family backgrounds, however, does not take account of the large number of participants who come to ArtPlay as part of free and large festival events and it should be noted that the school programs give emphasis to children from disadvantaged and marginalized communities.

Families bring their children to ArtPlay for a wide range of reasons such as the desire to expose their children to a ‘different’ experience, and an experience that promotes creativity and enjoyment (Figure 3). Families also look for workshops that relate to their child’s interests in the arts. The opportunity to work with artists was a significant reason for coming to ArtPlay for children aged eight and above in the school and long-term programs, but not for parents who came with young children. Another incentive noted by returning families was the welcoming and supportive staff, and the safe, practical and aesthetic qualities of the environment.

Greek 2%

Hindi 2%

Indonesian 2%

Italian 2%

Matjos Andjela 2%

Mandarin, Indonesian & Korean 2%

Other 12%

Unspecified13%

Turkish9%

SwissGerman

6%Spanish

4%

Japanese6%

Hebrew4%

Greek/Italian6%

German9%

Cantonese4%

Russian 4%

Romanian 4%

Mandarin, French& Polish 4%

Mandarin 6%

Korean 9%

Figure 3: Responses to Why did you come to ArtPlay today? (N=310)

Figure 2: Languages other than English spoken by families (N=155)

Making & Doing

Social Relations


Creativity

Something different

Confidence

Ideas for home

Groupwork


Creativity




Environment

Social Relations

ArtPlay staff

Making & doing



0

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

10 20 30 40 6050

11 12

Of the children surveyed (273), 92% said they enjoyed the workshops and 98% of their parents (93) agreed. The children made strong links between their enjoyment and the active making and doing (36%), and they valued using tools and materials, and creating a finished product. A small number of children (10%), particularly the older children, felt that working with artists and interacting socially with other children were the most memorable part of the workshops. Another group (8%) felt play was most important aspect. These positive reflections by children on their experiences at ArtPlay were strongly supported by other data from the observations and the artist interviews.

Workshop observations, informed by an engagement checklist (Table 1, p 32), indicated high levels of motivated, focused

and sustained participation. As well as the positive data, there were a small number of cases where children were not engaged, often as a result of their particular physical and emotional needs. Short periods of non-disruptive, child-determined, non-participation or ‘time out’, were not considered non-engagement but rather potentially positive opportunities for child reflection and re-charge.

Although children’s engagement was the primary focus of the study, high levels of parent engagement were also identified, particularly in the preschool programs. Parents in the focus groups discussed how positive it was to co-play and observe how their children interacted with others and such shared experiences also stimulated continued art and play experiences at home.

84

learning

The children and families who attend ArtPlay are predisposed to benefiting or learning from the experience. To elect to come is a decision in itself that shows an interest in and commitment to arts activities. Once there, the parents were invested in their children having a positive experience. A supportive family culture helps to enable a child’s openness to learn at ArtPlay but it does not necessarily determine it.

The data certainly support that ArtPlay programs offer children learning encounters in and through the arts. Of the families surveyed 97% believed that their child/

children had learnt something new at ArtPlay, particularly in relation to practical arts making and doing (78%) (Figure 4). Social relations, creativity and the development of confidence were also given some emphasis by the parents. Play and enjoyment were seen by parents (13%) as a clear ‘gain’, a benefit that matched one of the common reasons noted by families for why they came to ArtPlay. Opportunities to play and engage in creative processes are closely aligned. Valued by both artists and parents, such approaches to learning were commonly observed in the workshops and linked strongly to engagement.

13

In many workshops the demonstrated learning was evident largely in the completion of children’s artworks and performances but the involvement did not end there with a number of surveyed families saying they would consider trying the activity at home. This view was also supported by the parent focus groups where many families felt the experience had stimulated them to ‘take home’ the learning gained (art techniques, tools and processes) and explore them further with their children.

The development of practical arts skills and knowledge was evident. This was seen through small and subtle changes in the child’s practice such as the mastery of particular tools, techniques and processes, or through the accommodation of artist-introduced language and terminology. In the longer, multi-session workshops involving older children (8-13 years), developing specific competencies such as presentation and performance skills were more readily observed.

Other outcomes associated with learning through the arts were also noted by children and included creative thinking, art appreciation, group work skills and cultural appreciation. These more abstract areas of learning were given little emphasis by young people in comparison to the more concrete and active elements of making art. In contrast, the artists nominated providing children with opportunities to experience learning processes, sometimes modelled directly on their own arts practices, as the main benefits. They also believed it was important to support the concept of ‘learning to learn’ capacities such as self-efficacy, communication, collaboration, problem-solving and risk-taking. These opinions were reinforced by observations, which indicated many instances of children, even in short, one-off workshops, demonstrating a growing confidence to participate and contribute throughout the activities.

Figure 4: Responses to What did your child gain from today’s workshop? (N=234)

14

Outcomes such as creativity (12%) and the development of confidence (9%) were also given some attention by the parents. All the workshops observed gave some emphasis to creative processes stimulated by the artists as ‘starting points’. When given enough artist and other adult guidance as well as sufficient time to explore open concepts and techniques, the children demonstrated positive development in individual risk-taking, collaborative sharing and communication, and confidence to initiate and direct their own art-making. Such commonly observed encounters with learning were well supported by the artists, staff, families, teachers and the environment.

Making & Doing

Social Relations


Creativity

Something different

Confidence

Ideas for home

Groupwork


Creativity




Environment

Social Relations

ArtPlay staff

Making & doing



0

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

10 20 30 40 6050

85

learning

The children and families who attend ArtPlay are predisposed to benefiting or learning from the experience. To elect to come is a decision in itself that shows an interest in and commitment to arts activities. Once there, the parents were invested in their children having a positive experience. A supportive family culture helps to enable a child’s openness to learn at ArtPlay but it does not necessarily determine it.

The data certainly support that ArtPlay programs offer children learning encounters in and through the arts. Of the families surveyed 97% believed that their child/

children had learnt something new at ArtPlay, particularly in relation to practical arts making and doing (78%) (Figure 4). Social relations, creativity and the development of confidence were also given some emphasis by the parents. Play and enjoyment were seen by parents (13%) as a clear ‘gain’, a benefit that matched one of the common reasons noted by families for why they came to ArtPlay. Opportunities to play and engage in creative processes are closely aligned. Valued by both artists and parents, such approaches to learning were commonly observed in the workshops and linked strongly to engagement.

13

In many workshops the demonstrated learning was evident largely in the completion of children’s artworks and performances but the involvement did not end there with a number of surveyed families saying they would consider trying the activity at home. This view was also supported by the parent focus groups where many families felt the experience had stimulated them to ‘take home’ the learning gained (art techniques, tools and processes) and explore them further with their children.

The development of practical arts skills and knowledge was evident. This was seen through small and subtle changes in the child’s practice such as the mastery of particular tools, techniques and processes, or through the accommodation of artist-introduced language and terminology. In the longer, multi-session workshops involving older children (8-13 years), developing specific competencies such as presentation and performance skills were more readily observed.

Other outcomes associated with learning through the arts were also noted by children and included creative thinking, art appreciation, group work skills and cultural appreciation. These more abstract areas of learning were given little emphasis by young people in comparison to the more concrete and active elements of making art. In contrast, the artists nominated providing children with opportunities to experience learning processes, sometimes modelled directly on their own arts practices, as the main benefits. They also believed it was important to support the concept of ‘learning to learn’ capacities such as self-efficacy, communication, collaboration, problem-solving and risk-taking. These opinions were reinforced by observations, which indicated many instances of children, even in short, one-off workshops, demonstrating a growing confidence to participate and contribute throughout the activities.

Figure 4: Responses to What did your child gain from today’s workshop? (N=234)

14

Outcomes such as creativity (12%) and the development of confidence (9%) were also given some attention by the parents. All the workshops observed gave some emphasis to creative processes stimulated by the artists as ‘starting points’. When given enough artist and other adult guidance as well as sufficient time to explore open concepts and techniques, the children demonstrated positive development in individual risk-taking, collaborative sharing and communication, and confidence to initiate and direct their own art-making. Such commonly observed encounters with learning were well supported by the artists, staff, families, teachers and the environment.

Making & Doing

Social Relations


Creativity

Something different

Confidence

Ideas for home

Groupwork


Creativity




Environment

Social Relations

ArtPlay staff

Making & doing



0

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

10 20 30 40 6050

86

Cultural Citizenship

15

I love that the little boy came up and sat with me and hugged me. Yep, and his mum was like crying. Now, when he grows up I don’t want him to run around with the Aboriginal flag, but I want him to see himself more as part of this country and feel like he belongs. Artist

16

To some degree all the workshops provided opportunities for ‘cultural citizenship’. They provided occasions for children to access cultural knowledge that may not otherwise be available to them, particularly for young people coming from disadvantaged areas and individual families offered subsidized support to attend workshops. Public access to the program and inexpensive fees make the workshops available to most families, though the research has helped to identify the need for ArtPlay to further develop participation-building strategies and processes so as to enable a more diverse range of families to access the facility.

The presence of practicing artists provided the children and parents with direct encounters with cultural knowledge rarely available to them. The data indicate that children, parents and teachers valued the opportunity to see how artists work and to meet them personally. Such encounters helped to de-mystify the image of the artist and their profession and this may help to break down misconceptions that possibly limit children’s aspirations to engage in the arts. While important, the status of the artist did not appear to stimulate children and parent enrolment in the workshops, although in the case of the long-term workshops, such as the ArtPlay MSO Ensemble and the ArtPlay Puppet Troupe, there was some evidence that the participants chose the workshops because of the kudos gained from working alongside established artists.

The focus on child-centred, open and creative learning commonly emphasized throughout the workshops offered children opportunities to develop their own culture-producing capacities. Opportunities to imagine, create and make in a supportive and non-evaluative setting, engendered confidence in children to explore and communicate their ideas. The artist-led workshops commonly gave emphasis to collaborative art-making that involved child-child and/or child-adult co-creation. Such experiences required the children listen attentively to others, articulate and assert their personal views, consult and negotiate. Through these experiences, the children were actively developing the cultural tools and communicative capacities necessary to function successfully in a civic society.

Openings to critically interrogate difference and equity, in relation to cultural knowledge, were rarely observed in the workshops. At times children were exposed to different cultures, mainly through the cultural backgrounds of the artists, but it was uncommon for artists to explicitly engage children in discussion and art-making centred on issues of power, inequity and agency. The generally short duration of

the workshops potentially limited the capacity of artists to probe these complex issues and in most cases this was at odds with the primary reasons why children and families come to ArtPlay. Opportunities to engage critically with cultural knowledge were observed in some of the school and longer-term workshops but the possibilities for the children to develop their critical agent capacities were rare. The short-term nature of many workshops limited the opportunity for children to actively contribute to workshop planning and decision-making. In the school and longer-term workshops the children were still largely guided by the artist’s plan although these young people were able to contribute to group processes that focused on the development of emergent artworks and more complex topics including identity.

A focus on relationship building was as a key artist goal in several workshops. To realise this goal, artists deliberately planned group experiences that would encourage children to relate to each other and when present, to their parents. There were possibilities extending from this goal for participants to connect with others as part of larger, community-focused events. These normally took on the form of final public performances, presentations, and exhibitions that invited families and friends to view and celebrate the artworks created and such events provided broader community connections amongst the users.

Cultural citizenship is a broadly encompassing concept that makes reference to the opportunities children have in and beyond the practical workshop experiences at ArtPlay. It also draws attention to the rights of children to contribute to organisation practices and governance, and the responsibilities that arise from such input. While this was not a primary focus of the research, we observed how ArtPlay consults with children, families and artists, and the ability for them to contribute to general organizational decision-making. Strategies included contracted time support provided by the artists’ to engage in documented reflection following their workshops, family ‘Have Your Say’ days, and child membership with voting rights in a grant-funding committee. These strategies resonate with the principles of cultural citizenship. In order to involve a broader range of voices into the ArtPlay development, dedicated staff have been employed to build relationships with ‘hard to reach’ children and families from diverse backgrounds. This ambition to broaden ArtPlay’s reach by building relationships with potentially excluded groups has been the focus of further research4.

4. http://education.unimelb.edu.au/news_and_activities/projects/artplay/the_access_program

87

Cultural Citizenship

15


16

To some degree all the workshops provided opportunities for ‘cultural citizenship’. They provided occasions for children to access cultural knowledge that may not otherwise be available to them, particularly for young people coming from disadvantaged areas and individual families offered subsidized support to attend workshops. Public access to the program and inexpensive fees make the workshops available to most families, though the research has helped to identify the need for ArtPlay to further develop participation-building strategies and processes so as to enable a more diverse range of families to access the facility.

The presence of practicing artists provided the children and parents with direct encounters with cultural knowledge rarely available to them. The data indicate that children, parents and teachers valued the opportunity to see how artists work and to meet them personally. Such encounters helped to de-mystify the image of the artist and their profession and this may help to break down misconceptions that possibly limit children’s aspirations to engage in the arts. While important, the status of the artist did not appear to stimulate children and parent enrolment in the workshops, although in the case of the long-term workshops, such as the ArtPlay MSO Ensemble and the ArtPlay Puppet Troupe, there was some evidence that the participants chose the workshops because of the kudos gained from working alongside established artists.

The focus on child-centred, open and creative learning commonly emphasized throughout the workshops offered children opportunities to develop their own culture-producing capacities. Opportunities to imagine, create and make in a supportive and non-evaluative setting, engendered confidence in children to explore and communicate their ideas. The artist-led workshops commonly gave emphasis to collaborative art-making that involved child-child and/or child-adult co-creation. Such experiences required the children listen attentively to others, articulate and assert their personal views, consult and negotiate. Through these experiences, the children were actively developing the cultural tools and communicative capacities necessary to function successfully in a civic society.

Openings to critically interrogate difference and equity, in relation to cultural knowledge, were rarely observed in the workshops. At times children were exposed to different cultures, mainly through the cultural backgrounds of the artists, but it was uncommon for artists to explicitly engage children in discussion and art-making centred on issues of power, inequity and agency. The generally short duration of

the workshops potentially limited the capacity of artists to probe these complex issues and in most cases this was at odds with the primary reasons why children and families come to ArtPlay. Opportunities to engage critically with cultural knowledge were observed in some of the school and longer-term workshops but the possibilities for the children to develop their critical agent capacities were rare. The short-term nature of many workshops limited the opportunity for children to actively contribute to workshop planning and decision-making. In the school and longer-term workshops the children were still largely guided by the artist’s plan although these young people were able to contribute to group processes that focused on the development of emergent artworks and more complex topics including identity.

A focus on relationship building was as a key artist goal in several workshops. To realise this goal, artists deliberately planned group experiences that would encourage children to relate to each other and when present, to their parents. There were possibilities extending from this goal for participants to connect with others as part of larger, community-focused events. These normally took on the form of final public performances, presentations, and exhibitions that invited families and friends to view and celebrate the artworks created and such events provided broader community connections amongst the users.

Cultural citizenship is a broadly encompassing concept that makes reference to the opportunities children have in and beyond the practical workshop experiences at ArtPlay. It also draws attention to the rights of children to contribute to organisation practices and governance, and the responsibilities that arise from such input. While this was not a primary focus of the research, we observed how ArtPlay consults with children, families and artists, and the ability for them to contribute to general organizational decision-making. Strategies included contracted time support provided by the artists’ to engage in documented reflection following their workshops, family ‘Have Your Say’ days, and child membership with voting rights in a grant-funding committee. These strategies resonate with the principles of cultural citizenship. In order to involve a broader range of voices into the ArtPlay development, dedicated staff have been employed to build relationships with ‘hard to reach’ children and families from diverse backgrounds. This ambition to broaden ArtPlay’s reach by building relationships with potentially excluded groups has been the focus of further research4.

4. http://education.unimelb.edu.au/news_and_activities/projects/artplay/the_access_program

88

PRACTICAL ANDPERSONALISEDEXPERIENCE

PLANNED ANDRESPONSIVE

ARTISTCONNECTIONS

ARTIST ROLES

ARTISTCOMMUNICATION

CREATIVE LEARNINGINFORMED BYARTIST PRACTICE

TIME

TRANSFORMATIVEENVIRONMENT

AND MATERIALS

Model

Facilitator

Monitor

Director

Role sharing with other adults

Co-play

Collaborate

Co-create

Unhurried

Paced

Varied

Connected

Personal

Professional

Open-ended

Child-led

Age appropriate

Engaging topics

Children’s voice

Teacher

Parent

ArtPlay staff

Artist

Multi-modelcommunication

Practical

Customised

Inspiring

Multi-functional

Leadership

Supportive

Innovative

Motivated

Invested

Value play andcreative learning

Space Organisation Children & Families

Artists

Figure 5: Engaging Practice

Engaging Practice

17 18

The Organisation The Creative Producer, Simon Spain, uses the metaphor of the “cooked” and the “raw” to outline the philosophy underpinning the ArtPlay “studio”. He believes the children are provided with “raw” materials by the artist and from these, “create” their own inventions based on their interests and needs. This capacity to create is supported by the availability of engaging, artist-quality materials and an open and custom-designed studio-like environment dedicated to specific activities.

The approach to arts experiences promoted by ArtPlay leadership focus more on exploration and immersion than pre-determined, adult direct art-making. Artists employed at ArtPlay are guided by this position explained Alex, the Program Manager, who at times needs to advise artists to “limit the palette” they are working with so more space is left for the children “to think about innovative ways of using things”.

What struck me when I first came here, being new to the place, was that to me it’s been the balance between it being very creative and open-ended and welcoming and multi-aged, and yet underpinning that is a sense of order and intention and always philosophy and direction. Artist

Artists were well supported by ArtPlay staff, many of who were also artists or arts educators. This support ranged from welcoming participants and assisting artists as required during the workshops. The workshop support staff are present during all public workshops, both pre-school and public six-twelve year old programs but only required to host the long-term workshops, which are largely self-managed by experienced artists. School programs are supported by ArtPlay School Coordinators who work closely with artists to develop, implement and evaluate the workshops offered.

ArtPlay was regarded as a supportive environment by 95% of the artists. This support included:

• Planningadviceandfeedback• Licensetofocusonplay,creativeinquiry and innovative practices• Accesstodedicatedartsstudioandqualitymaterials• Fundedtimeforreflection• Accesstoprofessionallearningprograms

Acting as hosts, the ArtPlay staff provided emotional and practical support to children and families, engendering a positive atmosphere, one that can reduce anxieties and promote receptiveness to what is to follow. They invited and settled participants as they arrived and also modelled their enthusiasm for the upcoming activity. Families noted how welcomed they feel by front of house and other ArtPlay staff who provide personalised interactions, before, during and following the workshops, a service that includes making parents themselves feel confident in their own creative abilities. Such support complements the creative role of the artist in a variety of ways enabling a degree of continuity and connectedness with participants that may have otherwise been limited and restricted by the short-term encounters with participants.

They give a hand for everything, material and space wise, and they just help in controlling the situation if there is somebody who needs help, to find the toilet, but also just being part of the workshop. If there is a question about the topic they [ArtPlay staff] would come to me. They don’t take part in guiding and questioning the children like I do, but may make some suggestions. We talk before the children come and I explain what we’re going to do. They don’t take part in the introduction but they do take part in the whole workshop. I wouldn’t be able to work with twenty kids with all their parents alone (without ArtPlay staff). Artist

89

PRACTICAL ANDPERSONALISEDEXPERIENCE

PLANNED ANDRESPONSIVE

ARTISTCONNECTIONS

ARTIST ROLES

ARTISTCOMMUNICATION

CREATIVE LEARNINGINFORMED BYARTIST PRACTICE

TIME

TRANSFORMATIVEENVIRONMENT

AND MATERIALS

Model

Facilitator

Monitor

Director

Role sharing with other adults

Co-play

Collaborate

Co-create

Unhurried

Paced

Varied

Connected

Personal

Professional

Open-ended

Child-led

Age appropriate

Engaging topics

Children’s voice

Teacher

Parent

ArtPlay staff

Artist

Multi-modelcommunication

Practical

Customised

Inspiring

Multi-functional

Leadership

Supportive

Innovative

Motivated

Invested

Value play andcreative learning

Space Organisation Children & Families

Artists

Figure 5: Engaging Practice

Engaging Practice

17 18

The Organisation The Creative Producer, Simon Spain, uses the metaphor of the “cooked” and the “raw” to outline the philosophy underpinning the ArtPlay “studio”. He believes the children are provided with “raw” materials by the artist and from these, “create” their own inventions based on their interests and needs. This capacity to create is supported by the availability of engaging, artist-quality materials and an open and custom-designed studio-like environment dedicated to specific activities.

The approach to arts experiences promoted by ArtPlay leadership focus more on exploration and immersion than pre-determined, adult direct art-making. Artists employed at ArtPlay are guided by this position explained Alex, the Program Manager, who at times needs to advise artists to “limit the palette” they are working with so more space is left for the children “to think about innovative ways of using things”.

What struck me when I first came here, being new to the place, was that to me it’s been the balance between it being very creative and open-ended and welcoming and multi-aged, and yet underpinning that is a sense of order and intention and always philosophy and direction. Artist

Artists were well supported by ArtPlay staff, many of who were also artists or arts educators. This support ranged from welcoming participants and assisting artists as required during the workshops. The workshop support staff are present during all public workshops, both pre-school and public six-twelve year old programs but only required to host the long-term workshops, which are largely self-managed by experienced artists. School programs are supported by ArtPlay School Coordinators who work closely with artists to develop, implement and evaluate the workshops offered.

ArtPlay was regarded as a supportive environment by 95% of the artists. This support included:

• Planningadviceandfeedback• Licensetofocusonplay,creativeinquiry and innovative practices• Accesstodedicatedartsstudioandqualitymaterials• Fundedtimeforreflection• Accesstoprofessionallearningprograms

Acting as hosts, the ArtPlay staff provided emotional and practical support to children and families, engendering a positive atmosphere, one that can reduce anxieties and promote receptiveness to what is to follow. They invited and settled participants as they arrived and also modelled their enthusiasm for the upcoming activity. Families noted how welcomed they feel by front of house and other ArtPlay staff who provide personalised interactions, before, during and following the workshops, a service that includes making parents themselves feel confident in their own creative abilities. Such support complements the creative role of the artist in a variety of ways enabling a degree of continuity and connectedness with participants that may have otherwise been limited and restricted by the short-term encounters with participants.

They give a hand for everything, material and space wise, and they just help in controlling the situation if there is somebody who needs help, to find the toilet, but also just being part of the workshop. If there is a question about the topic they [ArtPlay staff] would come to me. They don’t take part in guiding and questioning the children like I do, but may make some suggestions. We talk before the children come and I explain what we’re going to do. They don’t take part in the introduction but they do take part in the whole workshop. I wouldn’t be able to work with twenty kids with all their parents alone (without ArtPlay staff). Artist

90

The Physical SpaceOpen to transformation the environment is continually custom-designed for the needs of each age group and art program, helping to engender immediate and focused interest.

What struck me when I first came here, being new to the place, was the balance between it being very creative and open-ended and welcoming and multi-aged, and yet underpinning that is a sense of order and intention and always philosophy and direction. Artist

Parents were appreciative that ArtPlay had been “specifically designed for children” and described the physical and psychological qualities of the environment as “beautiful”, “relaxed”, “unhurried”, and “flexible” to the specific needs of children and families.

There are not too many spaces so they don’t get lost in it. They have enough space to be themselves, to feel safe in that environment, and to be creative. Parent

The artists’ valued the aesthetic experience and emotional atmosphere, one they described as “a beautiful light space with few distractions”. They also valued highly the flexibility and multi-functional potential of the environment, one which could be adapted to meet the specific needs of the artists. Described as a “blank canvas”, the space was considered an “inspiring” environment, open to “reinvention and reshaping” and able to be “divided into different zones.”

19

Child and Family ExpectationsArtPlay attracts families for a range of reasons. As a central location with ready access to public transport and parking ArtPlay is a convenient destination for many families.

We don’t live that close. We catch the tram in and then we go to the playground, the Yarra river, the NGV [National Gallery of Victoria] and we might go around to the State Library and meet Lucy’s dad for lunch. It’s becomes a big part of our life. It’s becomes a bigger experience. Parent

The children and families who attended were largely predisposed to benefiting or learning from the experience. They elected to come, a decision in itself that shows interest and commitment, and once at ArtPlay, actively encouraged their children to take part in and enjoy the activities on offer. A preparedness to travel to the city and pay for a workshop (approximately $AUS10), requires a parent’s investment in the arts and cultural experiences offered at ArtPlay. Driven largely by children’s interests and/or adult perceptions of what children would be interested in, the parents come expecting anything from a one-off holiday fun experience to something more explicitly educational. Some families are motivated to enroll their child in a series of linked workshops to extend their learning, while other families value the opportunity to sample diverse one-off workshops without having to make a long term commitment. According one artist, “Some people just want something to do quick, something quick and easy to do, and some parents have really planned and thought, ‘yeah, I really want my kids to get a lot out of it’.”

In workshops involving children younger than eight years, the parents are required to attend and in most cases co-participate. In workshops involving older children, adult participation was more negotiated with children and ranged from observation to providing technical skill support. Whether they attended or not, all parents had to commit to dropping of and collecting children and paying the necessary fees. Such a supportive family culture encouraged child’s engagement but it did not necessarily guarantee it.

The ArtistsWhen we sat down it was so subtle. At first, I wondered what is really happening here? Is my child going to be engaged, because she’s never one to sit at storytime. Then after ten or fifteen minutes it seemed like magic. All the kids were involved and the artists’ just seemed to know exactly what and when to present to the children. It was all so seamless. They managed to get a level of engagement and intense interest with all the children without saying what to do, or giving out things. They just presented stuff for the children to take themselves when they felt that they wanted to. Parent

Artists were the key protagonist at ArtPlay, responsible for generating and leading practical workshops. Artist-child interactions were the key factor in child engagement and learning.

Connections

Artists quickly established relationships with the children, by introducing themselves informally, personally, and at times, playfully to children. This helped to alleviate any uncertainties and engage participants who, in most cases, had never met the artist before. Direct references to the artist’s practice, enhanced by personal stories engendered an open ‘emotional connection’ between participants, identified as a key element in artist child relations (Galton, 2008; Barkl, 2006; Parks, 1992). By exposing their personal, and in some case, cultural lives to children, artists were aiming to expand children’s awareness of their place in the world. As noted by an Indigenous storytelling artist,


20

91

The Physical SpaceOpen to transformation the environment is continually custom-designed for the needs of each age group and art program, helping to engender immediate and focused interest.

What struck me when I first came here, being new to the place, was the balance between it being very creative and open-ended and welcoming and multi-aged, and yet underpinning that is a sense of order and intention and always philosophy and direction. Artist

Parents were appreciative that ArtPlay had been “specifically designed for children” and described the physical and psychological qualities of the environment as “beautiful”, “relaxed”, “unhurried”, and “flexible” to the specific needs of children and families.

There are not too many spaces so they don’t get lost in it. They have enough space to be themselves, to feel safe in that environment, and to be creative. Parent

The artists’ valued the aesthetic experience and emotional atmosphere, one they described as “a beautiful light space with few distractions”. They also valued highly the flexibility and multi-functional potential of the environment, one which could be adapted to meet the specific needs of the artists. Described as a “blank canvas”, the space was considered an “inspiring” environment, open to “reinvention and reshaping” and able to be “divided into different zones.”

19

Child and Family ExpectationsArtPlay attracts families for a range of reasons. As a central location with ready access to public transport and parking ArtPlay is a convenient destination for many families.

We don’t live that close. We catch the tram in and then we go to the playground, the Yarra river, the NGV [National Gallery of Victoria] and we might go around to the State Library and meet Lucy’s dad for lunch. It’s becomes a big part of our life. It’s becomes a bigger experience. Parent

The children and families who attended were largely predisposed to benefiting or learning from the experience. They elected to come, a decision in itself that shows interest and commitment, and once at ArtPlay, actively encouraged their children to take part in and enjoy the activities on offer. A preparedness to travel to the city and pay for a workshop (approximately $AUS10), requires a parent’s investment in the arts and cultural experiences offered at ArtPlay. Driven largely by children’s interests and/or adult perceptions of what children would be interested in, the parents come expecting anything from a one-off holiday fun experience to something more explicitly educational. Some families are motivated to enroll their child in a series of linked workshops to extend their learning, while other families value the opportunity to sample diverse one-off workshops without having to make a long term commitment. According one artist, “Some people just want something to do quick, something quick and easy to do, and some parents have really planned and thought, ‘yeah, I really want my kids to get a lot out of it’.”

In workshops involving children younger than eight years, the parents are required to attend and in most cases co-participate. In workshops involving older children, adult participation was more negotiated with children and ranged from observation to providing technical skill support. Whether they attended or not, all parents had to commit to dropping of and collecting children and paying the necessary fees. Such a supportive family culture encouraged child’s engagement but it did not necessarily guarantee it.

The ArtistsWhen we sat down it was so subtle. At first, I wondered what is really happening here? Is my child going to be engaged, because she’s never one to sit at storytime. Then after ten or fifteen minutes it seemed like magic. All the kids were involved and the artists’ just seemed to know exactly what and when to present to the children. It was all so seamless. They managed to get a level of engagement and intense interest with all the children without saying what to do, or giving out things. They just presented stuff for the children to take themselves when they felt that they wanted to. Parent

Artists were the key protagonist at ArtPlay, responsible for generating and leading practical workshops. Artist-child interactions were the key factor in child engagement and learning.

Connections

Artists quickly established relationships with the children, by introducing themselves informally, personally, and at times, playfully to children. This helped to alleviate any uncertainties and engage participants who, in most cases, had never met the artist before. Direct references to the artist’s practice, enhanced by personal stories engendered an open ‘emotional connection’ between participants, identified as a key element in artist child relations (Galton, 2008; Barkl, 2006; Parks, 1992). By exposing their personal, and in some case, cultural lives to children, artists were aiming to expand children’s awareness of their place in the world. As noted by an Indigenous storytelling artist,


20

92

Practical and Personalised Experiences

Whilst artists were focused on practical learning their emphasis was more on experience than product. This was in contrast to ‘how-to-do’ workshops that families noted were commonly offered in out-of-school contexts. Parents appreciated the orientation to open-ended and creative learning encouraged at ArtPlay.

I think it’s a personalised experience as opposed to you know going to en masse children’s concert. They can come to a place like this and create something about their own experiences. Parent

People say it’s not like cookie cutter here. There are art classes and art things around that are just so ‘cookie cutter’- like here’s a box and everyone decorate the same box. It’s absolutely colour by numbers almost. It’s so boring. It’s great here because the level of creativity and the environment itself is brilliant. Parent

The need for individual programming presented a challenge in workshops that often involved children whose ages spanned three to four years in difference. Catering for such diversity required particular skills in the Preschool programs where the developmental differences between years was accentuated. Also in the School programs it was common for groups to comprise multi-grade levels, with many students not accustomed to working together before coming to ArtPlay. Attending to the individual interests and needs of children were further compounded by the fact that artists were not able to build their knowledge of the participating children with most workshops, especially the Preschool and Public programs involving once-off sessions. Despite these challenges the experience of artists supported by ArtPlay staff, teachers and parent, provided a strong basis for personalised experience and learning.

Planned and Responsive

To promote autonomous, personalised and creative learning which catered for a wide spectrum of interests and abilities, the artists adopted planned and responsive approaches to working with children. The artists were aware of the need for clear focus to the activities they presented to children, as explained by one artist.

Preschoolers need a strong basis from which to launch their creative play/narratives – either a strong evocative design, a rich narrative starting point or very specifically worded questions. Working with twenty children necessitates very clear directions and strongly guided group work. Artist

The artist attention to planning, however, was not a recipe for success. The ability to respond to the immediate needs and interests of children was a key point made by artists who noted that while it was important to have ideas on workshop structure and ‘starting points’, it was just as important to be “flexible and adaptable” both in terms of pace and content.

Any type of rigid process or presentation is usually counteractive to the intentions and expectations of families and children. It works better if artists are open and flexible in how they communicate and their approach and goals. Artist

Families supported this balanced approach to working with their children. As one parent stated,

I think the importance is having variety and the openness of the program. You can’t structure completely a program beforehand with children and expect them to engage. There was structure to the ‘story’, while leaving scope for each child to create individually, without being restricted in what they made, or did. Parent

This ability to plan for possibilities aligned with the invitational style approach adopted by artists, one in which children were given opportunities to present their views and lead their own art making.

21 22

Communication

Artists were aware that children were interested in practical activities and that the workshop introductions needed to be “simple, clear and involve not-to-defining demonstrations.” Put succinctly by one artist, “less talking and explaining is best” demonstrating the artists were clearly aware that establishing and maintaining engagement with young people required effective artist communication (Barkl 2006; Pringle, 2002). The artists used multiple forms of communication to initiate and sustain children’s engagement. For example, artists working with younger children commonly drew on embodied, oral and visual forms of communication to effectively engaged children. This capacity aligns with the artists’ preferred ways of communication, which relied more on embodied demonstration rather than abstracted oral explanation. The fact that the artists were effective communicators belies the long-standing, yet unsubstantiated, belief that artists lack skill in this area. This focus on multiple modes of expression and reception aligns with long-standing support for multi-symbolic and integrated learning (Dyson, 1990, Wright, 2011, Connery, John-Steiner & Marjanovic-Shane, 2010).

93

Practical and Personalised Experiences

Whilst artists were focused on practical learning their emphasis was more on experience than product. This was in contrast to ‘how-to-do’ workshops that families noted were commonly offered in out-of-school contexts. Parents appreciated the orientation to open-ended and creative learning encouraged at ArtPlay.

I think it’s a personalised experience as opposed to you know going to en masse children’s concert. They can come to a place like this and create something about their own experiences. Parent

People say it’s not like cookie cutter here. There are art classes and art things around that are just so ‘cookie cutter’- like here’s a box and everyone decorate the same box. It’s absolutely colour by numbers almost. It’s so boring. It’s great here because the level of creativity and the environment itself is brilliant. Parent

The need for individual programming presented a challenge in workshops that often involved children whose ages spanned three to four years in difference. Catering for such diversity required particular skills in the Preschool programs where the developmental differences between years was accentuated. Also in the School programs it was common for groups to comprise multi-grade levels, with many students not accustomed to working together before coming to ArtPlay. Attending to the individual interests and needs of children were further compounded by the fact that artists were not able to build their knowledge of the participating children with most workshops, especially the Preschool and Public programs involving once-off sessions. Despite these challenges the experience of artists supported by ArtPlay staff, teachers and parent, provided a strong basis for personalised experience and learning.

Planned and Responsive

To promote autonomous, personalised and creative learning which catered for a wide spectrum of interests and abilities, the artists adopted planned and responsive approaches to working with children. The artists were aware of the need for clear focus to the activities they presented to children, as explained by one artist.

Preschoolers need a strong basis from which to launch their creative play/narratives – either a strong evocative design, a rich narrative starting point or very specifically worded questions. Working with twenty children necessitates very clear directions and strongly guided group work. Artist

The artist attention to planning, however, was not a recipe for success. The ability to respond to the immediate needs and interests of children was a key point made by artists who noted that while it was important to have ideas on workshop structure and ‘starting points’, it was just as important to be “flexible and adaptable” both in terms of pace and content.

Any type of rigid process or presentation is usually counteractive to the intentions and expectations of families and children. It works better if artists are open and flexible in how they communicate and their approach and goals. Artist

Families supported this balanced approach to working with their children. As one parent stated,

I think the importance is having variety and the openness of the program. You can’t structure completely a program beforehand with children and expect them to engage. There was structure to the ‘story’, while leaving scope for each child to create individually, without being restricted in what they made, or did. Parent

This ability to plan for possibilities aligned with the invitational style approach adopted by artists, one in which children were given opportunities to present their views and lead their own art making.

21 22

Communication

Artists were aware that children were interested in practical activities and that the workshop introductions needed to be “simple, clear and involve not-to-defining demonstrations.” Put succinctly by one artist, “less talking and explaining is best” demonstrating the artists were clearly aware that establishing and maintaining engagement with young people required effective artist communication (Barkl 2006; Pringle, 2002). The artists used multiple forms of communication to initiate and sustain children’s engagement. For example, artists working with younger children commonly drew on embodied, oral and visual forms of communication to effectively engaged children. This capacity aligns with the artists’ preferred ways of communication, which relied more on embodied demonstration rather than abstracted oral explanation. The fact that the artists were effective communicators belies the long-standing, yet unsubstantiated, belief that artists lack skill in this area. This focus on multiple modes of expression and reception aligns with long-standing support for multi-symbolic and integrated learning (Dyson, 1990, Wright, 2011, Connery, John-Steiner & Marjanovic-Shane, 2010).

94

Roles

To promote engagement and learning artists needed to astutely and responsively move in and out of a repertoire of roles, particularly the roles of model, facilitator, engagement monitor and director. These roles were commonly shared with other adults at ArtPlay, including other artists, ArtPlay staff, teachers and parent/guardians.

The artists commonly introduced, stimulated and explained arts processes and techniques through modelled practice, also in line with other studies (Pringle, 2002; Barkl 2006; Brice-Heath & Wolf 2005). This was highly engaging to children on multiple levels. It reinforced the professional identity of the artist and exposed young people to the high level of specific knowledge and expertise of artists. Artist modelling ranged from giving inspirational examples to providing specific technical skills. Generally skills-based instruction was tailored to individual needs. Didactic skills based instruction, disassociated from children’s specific and short-term needs did not engage children.

Responding to children’s needs artists needed to ‘act on their feet’ and attune their responses to individual interests and goals, offering advice as required. As noted elsewhere, child engagement requires opportunities for children to lead their own explorations whilst gaining feedback as they do (Csikszentmihalyi, 1997). Taking on the role of facilitators’ they drew on informal and personalised approaches to interacting with children. Artists are orientated to dialogic and scaffolded communications with children (Galton, 2008), a practice that was particularly evident in the studio-like workshops that emphasised child directed individual and small group experience. Artist facilitation was put aptly by one school student.

Well, they [the artists] never say they really don’t like what you’re doing. They always, like, keep giving you advice to do - - make it better and stuff, instead of just saying – - instead of giving you a whole different idea.

When working towards a clear group artistic outcome, such as a performance or joint presentation, the artists also adopted the role of ‘director’. This role was most evident in multi-session workshops, involving older children who were sufficiently skilled and experienced, for example the ArtPlay MSO Ensemble and the ArtPlay Puppet Troupe. In such cases the a master and apprentice relationship was evident between artists and children.

The artists needed to skillfully decide when to interact with children and when to stand back allowing children to learn for themselves. This role of ‘engagement monitor’ involved strategies that manage dis-engagement without stifling independent and child-led creative processing. At times the children were disinclined to participate, or so eager they threatened to dominate at the expense of others.

In the case of the former, artists, with the support of ArtPlay staff and parents, were able to provide one-to-one support which generally re-engaged children, but not always. In the cases where the children were over-dominating or distracting others, the artists avoided using any authoritative child-management strategies, and instead simply gave time for children to reengage. This flexibility with time was crucial. When needed, children will create their own ‘time-out’ – engaging in playful, social and sometimes mischievous behaviours. Artists generally let such behaviours take their course, informally defusing and re-directing through the use of humorous and gentle quips. As noted by one teacher, artists need to avoid taking on the role of behaviour ‘managers’, which can break the contract between the artist and child as co-artists.

Working with unknown children and sometimes groups of forty participants (child and parents included) artists commonly worked in pairs. Eleven of the eighteen workshops observed were led by artist teams and pairs of artists led all of the Preschool workshops, which required high levels of direct engagement with young children. To sustain engagement and promote learning effective role sharing was needed between artists, ArtPlay staff, and teachers. For example, an artist would act as the lead communicator or director of the group while the second artist, ArtPlay staff member or teacher would check for disengaged children.

At ArtPlay, the parents are encouraged to participate alongside their children, particularly in the Preschool Program. Families have responded positively to this invitation evident in the following father’s comment.

I can’t remember which, after the first-class, they asked me how things went or how I enjoyed it, and my answer was I had an absolute ball because I let everything go, and for the adults in particular, to be able to come in from the suburb to a group of people that you are never going to see outside of this group is a real opportunity just to let it go. You don’t have to worry about getting hung up about what you are doing or how you’re behaving. The kids pick up on that. They can see dad sort of letting his hair down and prepared to be a clown. Parent

By modelling their own enthusiasm for playful learning, the parents encouraged rather than directed their children’s participation (O’Reilly & Bornstein, 1993). For some artists parent participation was a sensitive issue, one that required them to model and guide parents in their interactions with their children. As another parent commented, at ArtPlay, “it’s more about collaboration rather than parents doing it for kids.” This comment points to the potentially negative impact parents can have on their children’s art making if they over-direct and do not allow their children to learn

23

through their own processes. Such intervention can also be at odds with the aims of the artist, particularly when these focus on child-directed and creative learning.

Creative Learning Informed By The Artists’ Practice

The artists commonly acted as co-players, encouraging children, and in some cases also their parents, to participate through their own playful modelling, particularly in the early years performance arts workshops. In all the workshops observed artists encouraged children to play with ideas and materials so as to generate unexpected and new possibilities. In this respect play was synonymous with creative exploration. Artists, drawing from their own practices, were invested in collaborative projects, particularly when working in multi-session programs involving older children and children who had established relationships, such as in the case of school workshops or the ArtPlay Puppet Troupe. In single-session workshops involving younger children unknown to each other, artists were less likely to expect collaboration focused on the development of a group developed creative outcome. Resonant with other studies, the artists were adept at engaging children in creative processes through co-playing, collaboration and co-creation (Galton, 2008; Pringle, 2002; Selkrig, 2009; Brice-Heath & Wolf, 2005).

For some artists, their work with children not only informed their personal art practices, it was part of their art practices. When surveyed a number of artists commented that their

work with children was ‘inextricably’ linked to their own practices. One artist said, “I don’t distinguish between my personal creative practice and my work with children – it is all part of my creative practice.” This belief underpins the emphasis given to co-creation evident in some workshops, particularly longer-term programs such as the ArtPlay MSO Ensemble, and the ArtPlay Puppet Troupe. These programs enabled young people to contribute as ‘artists’ with the adult practitioners acting as directors and models. In the case of the Puppet Troupe a clear master-apprentice relationship was observed between the artists and the children. In both cases the young people involved were experienced and mature enough, and had sufficient time, to generate and input their ideas and skills into the co-production of artist-quality performances. It was most evident in these programs that artists explicitly drew children’s attentions to the mechanics of creativity; the creative processes children were working through to resolve problems and generate innovative and accomplished outcomes. For artists co-creating with children extended beyond imparting knowledge to learning themselves from children. Put aptly by one artist, “The workshops are an opportunity for us to learn how to learn from the children in a dynamic way where we can be free to take their imaginative lead.” Children were rarely observed co-creating with artists in single session public workshops or school workshops that were more focused on collaboration amongst children, or individual art making.

24

95

Roles

To promote engagement and learning artists needed to astutely and responsively move in and out of a repertoire of roles, particularly the roles of model, facilitator, engagement monitor and director. These roles were commonly shared with other adults at ArtPlay, including other artists, ArtPlay staff, teachers and parent/guardians.

The artists commonly introduced, stimulated and explained arts processes and techniques through modelled practice, also in line with other studies (Pringle, 2002; Barkl 2006; Brice-Heath & Wolf 2005). This was highly engaging to children on multiple levels. It reinforced the professional identity of the artist and exposed young people to the high level of specific knowledge and expertise of artists. Artist modelling ranged from giving inspirational examples to providing specific technical skills. Generally skills-based instruction was tailored to individual needs. Didactic skills based instruction, disassociated from children’s specific and short-term needs did not engage children.

Responding to children’s needs artists needed to ‘act on their feet’ and attune their responses to individual interests and goals, offering advice as required. As noted elsewhere, child engagement requires opportunities for children to lead their own explorations whilst gaining feedback as they do (Csikszentmihalyi, 1997). Taking on the role of facilitators’ they drew on informal and personalised approaches to interacting with children. Artists are orientated to dialogic and scaffolded communications with children (Galton, 2008), a practice that was particularly evident in the studio-like workshops that emphasised child directed individual and small group experience. Artist facilitation was put aptly by one school student.

Well, they [the artists] never say they really don’t like what you’re doing. They always, like, keep giving you advice to do - - make it better and stuff, instead of just saying – - instead of giving you a whole different idea.

When working towards a clear group artistic outcome, such as a performance or joint presentation, the artists also adopted the role of ‘director’. This role was most evident in multi-session workshops, involving older children who were sufficiently skilled and experienced, for example the ArtPlay MSO Ensemble and the ArtPlay Puppet Troupe. In such cases the a master and apprentice relationship was evident between artists and children.

The artists needed to skillfully decide when to interact with children and when to stand back allowing children to learn for themselves. This role of ‘engagement monitor’ involved strategies that manage dis-engagement without stifling independent and child-led creative processing. At times the children were disinclined to participate, or so eager they threatened to dominate at the expense of others.

In the case of the former, artists, with the support of ArtPlay staff and parents, were able to provide one-to-one support which generally re-engaged children, but not always. In the cases where the children were over-dominating or distracting others, the artists avoided using any authoritative child-management strategies, and instead simply gave time for children to reengage. This flexibility with time was crucial. When needed, children will create their own ‘time-out’ – engaging in playful, social and sometimes mischievous behaviours. Artists generally let such behaviours take their course, informally defusing and re-directing through the use of humorous and gentle quips. As noted by one teacher, artists need to avoid taking on the role of behaviour ‘managers’, which can break the contract between the artist and child as co-artists.

Working with unknown children and sometimes groups of forty participants (child and parents included) artists commonly worked in pairs. Eleven of the eighteen workshops observed were led by artist teams and pairs of artists led all of the Preschool workshops, which required high levels of direct engagement with young children. To sustain engagement and promote learning effective role sharing was needed between artists, ArtPlay staff, and teachers. For example, an artist would act as the lead communicator or director of the group while the second artist, ArtPlay staff member or teacher would check for disengaged children.

At ArtPlay, the parents are encouraged to participate alongside their children, particularly in the Preschool Program. Families have responded positively to this invitation evident in the following father’s comment.

I can’t remember which, after the first-class, they asked me how things went or how I enjoyed it, and my answer was I had an absolute ball because I let everything go, and for the adults in particular, to be able to come in from the suburb to a group of people that you are never going to see outside of this group is a real opportunity just to let it go. You don’t have to worry about getting hung up about what you are doing or how you’re behaving. The kids pick up on that. They can see dad sort of letting his hair down and prepared to be a clown. Parent

By modelling their own enthusiasm for playful learning, the parents encouraged rather than directed their children’s participation (O’Reilly & Bornstein, 1993). For some artists parent participation was a sensitive issue, one that required them to model and guide parents in their interactions with their children. As another parent commented, at ArtPlay, “it’s more about collaboration rather than parents doing it for kids.” This comment points to the potentially negative impact parents can have on their children’s art making if they over-direct and do not allow their children to learn

23

through their own processes. Such intervention can also be at odds with the aims of the artist, particularly when these focus on child-directed and creative learning.

Creative Learning Informed By The Artists’ Practice

The artists commonly acted as co-players, encouraging children, and in some cases also their parents, to participate through their own playful modelling, particularly in the early years performance arts workshops. In all the workshops observed artists encouraged children to play with ideas and materials so as to generate unexpected and new possibilities. In this respect play was synonymous with creative exploration. Artists, drawing from their own practices, were invested in collaborative projects, particularly when working in multi-session programs involving older children and children who had established relationships, such as in the case of school workshops or the ArtPlay Puppet Troupe. In single-session workshops involving younger children unknown to each other, artists were less likely to expect collaboration focused on the development of a group developed creative outcome. Resonant with other studies, the artists were adept at engaging children in creative processes through co-playing, collaboration and co-creation (Galton, 2008; Pringle, 2002; Selkrig, 2009; Brice-Heath & Wolf, 2005).

For some artists, their work with children not only informed their personal art practices, it was part of their art practices. When surveyed a number of artists commented that their

work with children was ‘inextricably’ linked to their own practices. One artist said, “I don’t distinguish between my personal creative practice and my work with children – it is all part of my creative practice.” This belief underpins the emphasis given to co-creation evident in some workshops, particularly longer-term programs such as the ArtPlay MSO Ensemble, and the ArtPlay Puppet Troupe. These programs enabled young people to contribute as ‘artists’ with the adult practitioners acting as directors and models. In the case of the Puppet Troupe a clear master-apprentice relationship was observed between the artists and the children. In both cases the young people involved were experienced and mature enough, and had sufficient time, to generate and input their ideas and skills into the co-production of artist-quality performances. It was most evident in these programs that artists explicitly drew children’s attentions to the mechanics of creativity; the creative processes children were working through to resolve problems and generate innovative and accomplished outcomes. For artists co-creating with children extended beyond imparting knowledge to learning themselves from children. Put aptly by one artist, “The workshops are an opportunity for us to learn how to learn from the children in a dynamic way where we can be free to take their imaginative lead.” Children were rarely observed co-creating with artists in single session public workshops or school workshops that were more focused on collaboration amongst children, or individual art making.

24

96

Transformative environment and materials

The artists purposefully transformed environments to inspire and engage children. Artists shared their knowledge and expertise with children, through the environments and materials they offered to children. This ranged widely from large open spaces punctuated with a few stimulating props such as large silver tubes, intimate shadow play enclosures, and studio-like configurations set up with a number of work stations. This flexibility to change was important to engaging return school groups, as explained by one teacher.

Number one they get engaged with the environment; the open space, the shifting space and that transient furniture. It’s never the same environment they walk into, so even if they are coming back for the second part of a workshop, it’s changed again and that sort of almost excites them and yet it’s also comfortable.

Providing sensory-rich materials stimulated engagement and inquiry, such as a collection of purposefully chosen recycled materials used for jewellery construction, or the vibrant shimmer of a colourful silk fabric, used to suggest a wave of water within a theatre arts workshop. Cognitively-rich materials, ones that were simple to control, and flexible

to diverse forms of creative manipulation and symbolization, also promoted engagement and learning. In contrast those materials that largely pre-determined child responses and creations, for example puppet templates, were less likely to engage children, particularly if the ‘rules’ of how to use such materials were not clear.

Interconnected and complementary, the aesthetic, technical and communicative potential of the materials, tools and resources commonly used in the workshops helped to transform how children engaged with the experiences offered. For example, in the Preschool Jam workshops the young children and their families were invited into the artist’s world through an intimate introduction to the artist’s double-bass, called ‘Blum’. Further to this they engaged an array of aesthetically vibrant materials including a rainbow coloured set of spinning bells. The children were also encouraged to improvise and ‘jam’ with an array of music-making tools generating their own cognitively rich musical responses. In diverse ways and on multiple levels access to such materials, tools and resources, gave emphasis to discovery-based approaches learning more so than to the development of technical competence with particular techniques and processes.

25

Time

The effective use of time and timing are essential to maintain momentum, encourage child-led and in-depth inquiry and cater for individual concentration and energy levels. Artists had to maintain a high level of animation, physical activity, and interaction, to sustain group engagement, particularly in performance arts workshops that required artists to responsively pace a series of varied activities.

Families indicated that they value the relaxed and non-rushed atmosphere at ArtPlay. In the case of drop-in workshops participants could determine their own pace and point of completion. In some workshops the sense of time is intense with children being required to do quite a lot over a short period of time, for example What if Dance and the ArtPlay MSO Ensemble. To manage such intensity requires artists to clearly lead and prompt but not present a rushed approach to the workshop content. It also required artists to be aware

that while children can and should be treated as co-artists, they are not co-adults and thus have different physical and emotional needs that will invariably impact on their ability to concentrate and sustain engagement. Commonly the ArtPlay workshops were effectively paced though artists needed to ensure there was sufficient unpressured ‘time-out.’

Whole day sessions encouraged in-depth and uninterrupted focus at ArtPlay. For school groups, the opportunity to focus on one activity, in a dedicated arts facility, all day maximized learning. As one teacher noted, “working a whole day here is like a week of art sessions at school because it’s all here.” This sentiment is shared, as explained by one young student who explained that at ArtPlay, “it’s much more focused. At school, there are quite a few distractions and, you know you’ve got time and all that here.”

26

97

Transformative environment and materials

The artists purposefully transformed environments to inspire and engage children. Artists shared their knowledge and expertise with children, through the environments and materials they offered to children. This ranged widely from large open spaces punctuated with a few stimulating props such as large silver tubes, intimate shadow play enclosures, and studio-like configurations set up with a number of work stations. This flexibility to change was important to engaging return school groups, as explained by one teacher.

Number one they get engaged with the environment; the open space, the shifting space and that transient furniture. It’s never the same environment they walk into, so even if they are coming back for the second part of a workshop, it’s changed again and that sort of almost excites them and yet it’s also comfortable.

Providing sensory-rich materials stimulated engagement and inquiry, such as a collection of purposefully chosen recycled materials used for jewellery construction, or the vibrant shimmer of a colourful silk fabric, used to suggest a wave of water within a theatre arts workshop. Cognitively-rich materials, ones that were simple to control, and flexible

to diverse forms of creative manipulation and symbolization, also promoted engagement and learning. In contrast those materials that largely pre-determined child responses and creations, for example puppet templates, were less likely to engage children, particularly if the ‘rules’ of how to use such materials were not clear.

Interconnected and complementary, the aesthetic, technical and communicative potential of the materials, tools and resources commonly used in the workshops helped to transform how children engaged with the experiences offered. For example, in the Preschool Jam workshops the young children and their families were invited into the artist’s world through an intimate introduction to the artist’s double-bass, called ‘Blum’. Further to this they engaged an array of aesthetically vibrant materials including a rainbow coloured set of spinning bells. The children were also encouraged to improvise and ‘jam’ with an array of music-making tools generating their own cognitively rich musical responses. In diverse ways and on multiple levels access to such materials, tools and resources, gave emphasis to discovery-based approaches learning more so than to the development of technical competence with particular techniques and processes.

25

Time

The effective use of time and timing are essential to maintain momentum, encourage child-led and in-depth inquiry and cater for individual concentration and energy levels. Artists had to maintain a high level of animation, physical activity, and interaction, to sustain group engagement, particularly in performance arts workshops that required artists to responsively pace a series of varied activities.

Families indicated that they value the relaxed and non-rushed atmosphere at ArtPlay. In the case of drop-in workshops participants could determine their own pace and point of completion. In some workshops the sense of time is intense with children being required to do quite a lot over a short period of time, for example What if Dance and the ArtPlay MSO Ensemble. To manage such intensity requires artists to clearly lead and prompt but not present a rushed approach to the workshop content. It also required artists to be aware

that while children can and should be treated as co-artists, they are not co-adults and thus have different physical and emotional needs that will invariably impact on their ability to concentrate and sustain engagement. Commonly the ArtPlay workshops were effectively paced though artists needed to ensure there was sufficient unpressured ‘time-out.’

Whole day sessions encouraged in-depth and uninterrupted focus at ArtPlay. For school groups, the opportunity to focus on one activity, in a dedicated arts facility, all day maximized learning. As one teacher noted, “working a whole day here is like a week of art sessions at school because it’s all here.” This sentiment is shared, as explained by one young student who explained that at ArtPlay, “it’s much more focused. At school, there are quite a few distractions and, you know you’ve got time and all that here.”

26

98

Contextualising Engagement and LearningTo engage children, the programs needed to be attuned to the specific needs of individuals and groups. The focus on learning in and through the arts demonstrated at ArtPlay varied in orientation between the programs. The age of children involved and the length of the workshop informed the workshops goals and the key roles adopted by the artists. Different orientations to engagement and learning were also evident in the programs. The short-term programs, involving younger children, focused more on playful and exploratory learning encounters, while the longer-term programs with older children emphasised both exploratory processes and the production of artworks and performances. In multi-session workshops involving older children who came with the expectation to develop skillful artistic outcomes, the artists are more likely to act as directors, particularly if there was a culminating performance (see Figure 6).

Process & play orientated

Emphasis given to enjoymentand sensory exploration

Artist as facilitator,model & co-player

Artistic outcome orientated

Emphasis given to creativeinquiry and collaboration

Artist as facilitator model,director & co-creator

Learningthroughthe arts

Youngerchild

Olderchild

Singlesession

Multiplesessions

Learningin thearts

27

Figure 6: Orientations to engagment and learning

Engaging Practice across workshops The positive conditions for engagement and learning that emerged from the research:

• Accessto‘artistquality’materialsandequipment

• Adequatetimegivenin‘studio-like’workshopsforchildimmersionandself-directedlearning

• Artistdemonstrationsofspecificskillsandtechniquesthroughouttheworkshopasrequired

• Clearartistdirection,demonstrationandmodelling

• Clearlyplannedandarticulatedworkshopgoalsandstructure

• Effectiveplanningofsequence,paceandorganisation

• EffectiverolesharingbetweenartistteamsorartistsandArtPlaystaff

• Emphasisgiventobothprocess-orientatedchild-leddiscoveryandtotheachievement of specific art products and presentations

• Emphasisgiventoboththeexplorationofmaterials,specificskillsandtechniques, and to the production of a quality work

• Encouragementforchildrentotakeonnewchallenges

• Informalrelationswiththeartistwhichengenderedaemotionallysupportiveatmosphere

• Inquiry-basedprojecttopicsthatrelatetoyoungpeople’sinterests

• Opportunitiesforbothindividualandgroupexploration

• Opportunitiestocollaborateandco-create

• Regularopportunitiesforparticipantinput

• Responsiveartistfacilitationandfeedbacktunedtochildren’sinterests,creativeprocesses and practical skill needs

• Shortandpracticalintroductionssupportedbyartistdemonstrationsandmulti-model communication

• Simpletouse,aestheticallyengaging,cognitivellyrich,andreadilytransformablematerials that are open to creative interpretation

• Spaces,generallylarge,setupforspecificandsingularartsactivities

• SupportiveArtPlaystaffwhowelcomeandmakefamiliesfeelsecureandcomfortable, and continue to act as hosts and facilitators throughout the workshop

• Workshopcontentandtasksaccessibletodiverseabilitiesandages (up to four years difference in some workshops)

28

99

Contextualising Engagement and LearningTo engage children, the programs needed to be attuned to the specific needs of individuals and groups. The focus on learning in and through the arts demonstrated at ArtPlay varied in orientation between the programs. The age of children involved and the length of the workshop informed the workshops goals and the key roles adopted by the artists. Different orientations to engagement and learning were also evident in the programs. The short-term programs, involving younger children, focused more on playful and exploratory learning encounters, while the longer-term programs with older children emphasised both exploratory processes and the production of artworks and performances. In multi-session workshops involving older children who came with the expectation to develop skillful artistic outcomes, the artists are more likely to act as directors, particularly if there was a culminating performance (see Figure 6).

Process & play orientated

Emphasis given to enjoymentand sensory exploration

Artist as facilitator,model & co-player

Artistic outcome orientated

Emphasis given to creativeinquiry and collaboration

Artist as facilitator model,director & co-creator

Learningthroughthe arts

Youngerchild

Olderchild

Singlesession

Multiplesessions

Learningin thearts

27

Figure 6: Orientations to engagment and learning

Engaging Practice across workshops The positive conditions for engagement and learning that emerged from the research:

• Accessto‘artistquality’materialsandequipment

• Adequatetimegivenin‘studio-like’workshopsforchildimmersionandself-directedlearning

• Artistdemonstrationsofspecificskillsandtechniquesthroughouttheworkshopasrequired


• Clearlyplannedandarticulatedworkshopgoalsandstructure

• Effectiveplanningofsequence,paceandorganisation

• EffectiverolesharingbetweenartistteamsorartistsandArtPlaystaff

• Emphasisgiventobothprocess-orientatedchild-leddiscoveryandtotheachievement of specific art products and presentations

• Emphasisgiventoboththeexplorationofmaterials,specificskillsandtechniques, and to the production of a quality work

• Encouragementforchildrentotakeonnewchallenges

• Informalrelationswiththeartistwhichengenderedaemotionallysupportiveatmosphere

• Inquiry-basedprojecttopicsthatrelatetoyoungpeople’sinterests

• Opportunitiesforbothindividualandgroupexploration

• Opportunitiestocollaborateandco-create

• Regularopportunitiesforparticipantinput

• Responsiveartistfacilitationandfeedbacktunedtochildren’sinterests,creativeprocesses and practical skill needs

• Shortandpracticalintroductionssupportedbyartistdemonstrationsandmulti-model communication

• Simpletouse,aestheticallyengaging,cognitivellyrich,andreadilytransformablematerials that are open to creative interpretation

• Spaces,generallylarge,setupforspecificandsingularartsactivities

• SupportiveArtPlaystaffwhowelcomeandmakefamiliesfeelsecureandcomfortable, and continue to act as hosts and facilitators throughout the workshop

• Workshopcontentandtasksaccessibletodiverseabilitiesandages (up to four years difference in some workshops)

28

100

Engaging Practice Specific To Workshop Type Preschool Programs

• Aguidedratherthandirectedapproachtochildbehaviourmanagement,utilizingplayful re-directions and one-to-one encouragement with children that were flexibly integrated into practical arts experiences

• Artsexperiencesexploredthroughcreativeplay

• Diverseandmulti-modal/multi-artsexperiencesincorporatedthroughouttheworkshop

• Environmentsetupwithcomfortableseatingforchildrenandadultsanddedicated contained areas set up for specific activities

• Personalandplayfulandinvitationalartistconnections

• Workshopcontentandtasksaccessibletodiverseabilitiesandages(fromtwoyearolds to five year olds) and focused on learning through direct and embodied experience (concrete operational not abstract)

School Programs

• SupportiveArtPlayschoolprogramcoordinatorwhoactsasliaison,betweenteachers, students and the artists. If required he/she also co-facilitates the workshop working alongside the artist

• Teacherssupportartistsprimarilybyencouragingstudentparticipationandmonitoring student behaviours

• Intensivefulldayworkshops

Long Term

• Artistone-to-oneandsmallgroupmentoringthatencouragedyoungpeopletoextend specific skills and creative ideas and take on new challenges

• Childrenengagedasapprenticestoartists


• Opportunitiesforyoungpeopletolearnabouttheprofessionalexperiencesofartists

• Richandthoughtprovokingtopicsofinquiry

• Sufficienttimeforparticipantstoexploreanddevelopideas


29

conclusion

The distinctive combination of artistic, developmental and cultural elements housed at ArtPlay where children, parents and teachers are able to engage directly with artists and art-making in a non-school environment, provided a unique research opportunity. We have investigated the multi-dimensional nature of ArtPlay, why families come to ArtPlay and what they gain by doing so. We have also identified the conditions that enable positive encounters with artist-led programs in a public arts facility. The great majority of children and families are indeed engaged when they participate in the offerings at ArtPlay. The key learning outcomes were the development of confidence in the children who are challenged to try ‘something different’, and in doing so engage in creative and collaborative learning processes. The analysis of the child, parent and artist views on learning indicated that children most value the practical hands-on learning experiences. Such learning is also valued by artists and parents but they also see practical art-making as a means to an end, with learning dispositions such as the development of creative thinking and self-confidence commonly cited as the key aspirations they have for engaging their children with the arts at ArtPlay.

Parents also benefit from the experience and they value the arts experiences offered at ArtPlay. Beyond the benefit of taking home ideas for further arts activities, the parents also value the opportunities to play alongside their children and observe how their children interact and respond in a public space. The knowledge gained from this project has led to further research with the City of Melbourne to explore child and family engagement in other sites across the city, including libraries and public parks and informed the early development of a child and family play policy across the council.

Intensive, full day schedules, informal artist-student relations, and access to dedicated arts facilities are the main factors that engage school groups in the workshops. The learning generated in the School programs has reinforced the value and need for effective engagement between ArtPlay and schools and a commitment to building and sustaining long-term partnerships. The potential value of these partnerships has gone beyond the arts arena with the teachers from one school adapting the observation engagement framework for their own use in consultation with the researchers. This has implications for other arts partnerships with these principles of engaging practice, the design of the learning environment and reflection being applicable to both community and school-based arts programs.

This study was undertaken in an open and receptive environment, rightly identified as a ‘rich site’ for research (Davis, 2008). Throughout the investigation we have actively sought the views of all those involved at ArtPlay and our formative analyses have stimulated on-going reflection, interrogation and exchange which has strengthened the organisation’s capacity to target, broaden and deepen the programs. The process and outcomes of this research are also now widely referred to in subjects in Melbourne Graduate School of Education’s post-graduate and breadth offerings. The value of ArtPlay for research and learning is immense and a number of subjects incorporate student observations of ArtPlay into the assessment requirements and ArtPlay leadership (pro bono) for guest lectures.

In summary this research has:

• generatedknowledgethatisrelevantandaccessible in relation to child engagement, learning and cultural citizenship, and the conditions that support such constructs.

• providedamulti-facetedrepresentationthatwillassist artists, arts organisations and other professionals to reflect upon and articulate their working practices with children and families

• engenderedthedevelopmentofaresearch-informed culture at ArtPlay one that has generated continuous improvement and growth

This is the first large-scale study into child and family engagement in a public arts facility. The length, scale and depth of the research is rare in arts education and has generated interest globally and invitations to speak both nationally and internationally. The relevance and reach of this research has already extended beyond ArtPlay and has implications for any program and/or site that aspires to deeply engage children and families in the arts.

30

101

Engaging Practice Specific To Workshop Type Preschool Programs

• Aguidedratherthandirectedapproachtochildbehaviourmanagement,utilizingplayful re-directions and one-to-one encouragement with children that were flexibly integrated into practical arts experiences

• Artsexperiencesexploredthroughcreativeplay

• Diverseandmulti-modal/multi-artsexperiencesincorporatedthroughouttheworkshop

• Environmentsetupwithcomfortableseatingforchildrenandadultsanddedicated contained areas set up for specific activities

• Personalandplayfulandinvitationalartistconnections

• Workshopcontentandtasksaccessibletodiverseabilitiesandages(fromtwoyearolds to five year olds) and focused on learning through direct and embodied experience (concrete operational not abstract)

School Programs

• SupportiveArtPlayschoolprogramcoordinatorwhoactsasliaison,betweenteachers, students and the artists. If required he/she also co-facilitates the workshop working alongside the artist

• Teacherssupportartistsprimarilybyencouragingstudentparticipationandmonitoring student behaviours


Long Term

• Artistone-to-oneandsmallgroupmentoringthatencouragedyoungpeopletoextend specific skills and creative ideas and take on new challenges

• Childrenengagedasapprenticestoartists


• Opportunitiesforyoungpeopletolearnabouttheprofessionalexperiencesofartists

• Richandthoughtprovokingtopicsofinquiry

• Sufficienttimeforparticipantstoexploreanddevelopideas


29

conclusion

The distinctive combination of artistic, developmental and cultural elements housed at ArtPlay where children, parents and teachers are able to engage directly with artists and art-making in a non-school environment, provided a unique research opportunity. We have investigated the multi-dimensional nature of ArtPlay, why families come to ArtPlay and what they gain by doing so. We have also identified the conditions that enable positive encounters with artist-led programs in a public arts facility. The great majority of children and families are indeed engaged when they participate in the offerings at ArtPlay. The key learning outcomes were the development of confidence in the children who are challenged to try ‘something different’, and in doing so engage in creative and collaborative learning processes. The analysis of the child, parent and artist views on learning indicated that children most value the practical hands-on learning experiences. Such learning is also valued by artists and parents but they also see practical art-making as a means to an end, with learning dispositions such as the development of creative thinking and self-confidence commonly cited as the key aspirations they have for engaging their children with the arts at ArtPlay.

Parents also benefit from the experience and they value the arts experiences offered at ArtPlay. Beyond the benefit of taking home ideas for further arts activities, the parents also value the opportunities to play alongside their children and observe how their children interact and respond in a public space. The knowledge gained from this project has led to further research with the City of Melbourne to explore child and family engagement in other sites across the city, including libraries and public parks and informed the early development of a child and family play policy across the council.

Intensive, full day schedules, informal artist-student relations, and access to dedicated arts facilities are the main factors that engage school groups in the workshops. The learning generated in the School programs has reinforced the value and need for effective engagement between ArtPlay and schools and a commitment to building and sustaining long-term partnerships. The potential value of these partnerships has gone beyond the arts arena with the teachers from one school adapting the observation engagement framework for their own use in consultation with the researchers. This has implications for other arts partnerships with these principles of engaging practice, the design of the learning environment and reflection being applicable to both community and school-based arts programs.

This study was undertaken in an open and receptive environment, rightly identified as a ‘rich site’ for research (Davis, 2008). Throughout the investigation we have actively sought the views of all those involved at ArtPlay and our formative analyses have stimulated on-going reflection, interrogation and exchange which has strengthened the organisation’s capacity to target, broaden and deepen the programs. The process and outcomes of this research are also now widely referred to in subjects in Melbourne Graduate School of Education’s post-graduate and breadth offerings. The value of ArtPlay for research and learning is immense and a number of subjects incorporate student observations of ArtPlay into the assessment requirements and ArtPlay leadership (pro bono) for guest lectures.

In summary this research has:

• generatedknowledgethatisrelevantandaccessible in relation to child engagement, learning and cultural citizenship, and the conditions that support such constructs.

• providedamulti-facetedrepresentationthatwillassist artists, arts organisations and other professionals to reflect upon and articulate their working practices with children and families

• engenderedthedevelopmentofaresearch-informed culture at ArtPlay one that has generated continuous improvement and growth

This is the first large-scale study into child and family engagement in a public arts facility. The length, scale and depth of the research is rare in arts education and has generated interest globally and invitations to speak both nationally and internationally. The relevance and reach of this research has already extended beyond ArtPlay and has implications for any program and/or site that aspires to deeply engage children and families in the arts.

30

102

About the Research

Soon after it opened, communications between the City of Melbourne and the University of Melbourne were established to research the phenomena of ArtPlay. This partnership, with support from the Australian Research Council and the Australia Council for the Arts, led to a four-year study entitled, Mapping and augmenting engagement, learning and cultural citizenship for children through ArtPlay workshops with artists. The project began in July 2007 with the opportunity to conduct sustained and in-depth research within a space specifically designed for art and play experiences for children aged 3-13 not previously available in Australia.

We set out to investigate ArtPlay based on the findings from our pilot study: we would examine how children respond to the workshops (engagement), what they gain or benefit from such experiences (learning), and what broader encounters with culture and community were evident (cultural citizenship). As is the convention, we would extend and deepen our preliminary review of the pertinent literature and research related to these areas. We, the researchers, underwent an evolution of thinking

about these areas in response to the unfolding map of ArtPlay, and so our searching of the literature was ongoing. Our theoretical understanding of engagement evolved in a fairly linear way from what we thought was a solid understanding to a much deeper and complex conception of the term both generally, and specifically to the context of ArtPlay. Our exploration of cultural citizenship transformed from a somewhat vague conception (in retrospect), to a confident definition and positioning of ourselves and ArtPlay in relation to the various relatable perspectives presented in the literature. We brought a collective practitioner knowledge to the project. We three have been or are: teachers in schools, teachers in non-school settings, professional development leaders for teachers, curriculum writers, assessors of arts learning from early childhood to tertiary, writers of teacher support materials, teacher educators, researchers and artists, and we brought all these perspectives to what we initially thought was the “easiest” of the three areas of investigation – learning. Ironically, it has proved to be the most difficult of the three areas to conceptualise in relation to ArtPlay.

31

We adopted a mixed-methods approach aligned with ethnographic and participatory action research (Delamont, 2012; Creswell & Plano Clark, 2011; Campbell & Groundwater-Smith, 2010; Whyte, 1991). The data collected included multiple observations, interviews with artists, ArtPlay staff and key stakeholders, family surveys, family focus groups and meeting notes. Eighteen workshops selected for detailed analysis, provided a representative sample of diverse art forms, age groups, and workshop types (see Figure 1) that were grouped into four programs:

• PreschoolWorkshopsfor3-5yearolds

• PublicWorkshopsfor6-13yearolds

• SchoolWorkshopsfor7-13yearolds,and

• Long-termWorkshopsfor7-13yearolds

(see Appendix for a complete list)

Engagement Engagement is a common concept in the fields of arts education and educational psychology, and we have drawn widely on theoretical views (Russell, Ainley & Frydenberg, 2005, Wefald & Downey, 2009). We have also sought examples of tools, indicators and methods with which to identify and map child engagement (Chapman, 2003, Chappell & Young, 2007, Jones, 2009). With data collected via observations, interviews and focus groups, we have both tested and generated ways to interpret engagement in relation to the particular context of ArtPlay. We decided that a general definition for engagement would include the positive affective and cognitive state of self-motivated involvement characterized by initiation, sustained dedication and absorption. We have both tested and generated ways to interpret engagement in relation to the particular context of ArtPlay, and developed an Engagement Observation Checklist (Table 1) for an accurate and consistent identification of what was talking place at both the group and individual level during the workshops.

32

Types of Engagement

Evident when

Taking In children display sustained attentiveness, concentration and receptivity to verbal and non-verbal presentations and demonstrations

Putting In children exhibit a willingness and confidence to contribute, verbally and non-verbally, their ideas and initiate and lead their own activities

Taking On children transfer enthusiastically and confidently, and readily become focused on a new task

On Task children actively and willingly participate in set tasks for significant periods of time, showing concentration and precision

Time Out children display short period of non-disruptive non-participation followed by a willing readiness to re-engage

Non-engagement is evident when participants show little or no self-initiative, are readily distracted, and through expressions of negative affective-motivational states including, defensiveness, disruptiveness and frustration.

Working in pairs and guided by the above checklist, the researchers undertook 100+ hours of observations which served as the primary data for this study. Equally important and complementary to observation interpretations were those given by the participants themselves and we gave emphasis to the reflections of the children and parents in the analysis of engagement.

Table 1: Engagement Observation Checklist

103

About the Research

Soon after it opened, communications between the City of Melbourne and the University of Melbourne were established to research the phenomena of ArtPlay. This partnership, with support from the Australian Research Council and the Australia Council for the Arts, led to a four-year study entitled, Mapping and augmenting engagement, learning and cultural citizenship for children through ArtPlay workshops with artists. The project began in July 2007 with the opportunity to conduct sustained and in-depth research within a space specifically designed for art and play experiences for children aged 3-13 not previously available in Australia.

We set out to investigate ArtPlay based on the findings from our pilot study: we would examine how children respond to the workshops (engagement), what they gain or benefit from such experiences (learning), and what broader encounters with culture and community were evident (cultural citizenship). As is the convention, we would extend and deepen our preliminary review of the pertinent literature and research related to these areas. We, the researchers, underwent an evolution of thinking

about these areas in response to the unfolding map of ArtPlay, and so our searching of the literature was ongoing. Our theoretical understanding of engagement evolved in a fairly linear way from what we thought was a solid understanding to a much deeper and complex conception of the term both generally, and specifically to the context of ArtPlay. Our exploration of cultural citizenship transformed from a somewhat vague conception (in retrospect), to a confident definition and positioning of ourselves and ArtPlay in relation to the various relatable perspectives presented in the literature. We brought a collective practitioner knowledge to the project. We three have been or are: teachers in schools, teachers in non-school settings, professional development leaders for teachers, curriculum writers, assessors of arts learning from early childhood to tertiary, writers of teacher support materials, teacher educators, researchers and artists, and we brought all these perspectives to what we initially thought was the “easiest” of the three areas of investigation – learning. Ironically, it has proved to be the most difficult of the three areas to conceptualise in relation to ArtPlay.

31

We adopted a mixed-methods approach aligned with ethnographic and participatory action research (Delamont, 2012; Creswell & Plano Clark, 2011; Campbell & Groundwater-Smith, 2010; Whyte, 1991). The data collected included multiple observations, interviews with artists, ArtPlay staff and key stakeholders, family surveys, family focus groups and meeting notes. Eighteen workshops selected for detailed analysis, provided a representative sample of diverse art forms, age groups, and workshop types (see Figure 1) that were grouped into four programs:

• PreschoolWorkshopsfor3-5yearolds

• PublicWorkshopsfor6-13yearolds

• SchoolWorkshopsfor7-13yearolds,and

• Long-termWorkshopsfor7-13yearolds

(see Appendix for a complete list)

Engagement Engagement is a common concept in the fields of arts education and educational psychology, and we have drawn widely on theoretical views (Russell, Ainley & Frydenberg, 2005, Wefald & Downey, 2009). We have also sought examples of tools, indicators and methods with which to identify and map child engagement (Chapman, 2003, Chappell & Young, 2007, Jones, 2009). With data collected via observations, interviews and focus groups, we have both tested and generated ways to interpret engagement in relation to the particular context of ArtPlay. We decided that a general definition for engagement would include the positive affective and cognitive state of self-motivated involvement characterized by initiation, sustained dedication and absorption. We have both tested and generated ways to interpret engagement in relation to the particular context of ArtPlay, and developed an Engagement Observation Checklist (Table 1) for an accurate and consistent identification of what was talking place at both the group and individual level during the workshops.

32

Types of Engagement

Evident when

Taking In children display sustained attentiveness, concentration and receptivity to verbal and non-verbal presentations and demonstrations

Putting In children exhibit a willingness and confidence to contribute, verbally and non-verbally, their ideas and initiate and lead their own activities

Taking On children transfer enthusiastically and confidently, and readily become focused on a new task

On Task children actively and willingly participate in set tasks for significant periods of time, showing concentration and precision

Time Out children display short period of non-disruptive non-participation followed by a willing readiness to re-engage

Non-engagement is evident when participants show little or no self-initiative, are readily distracted, and through expressions of negative affective-motivational states including, defensiveness, disruptiveness and frustration.

Working in pairs and guided by the above checklist, the researchers undertook 100+ hours of observations which served as the primary data for this study. Equally important and complementary to observation interpretations were those given by the participants themselves and we gave emphasis to the reflections of the children and parents in the analysis of engagement.

Table 1: Engagement Observation Checklist

104

Learning The nature of short-term, community-based programs involving irregular users whose backgrounds are unknown can confound attempts to provide systematic evidence of development and attainment. We are accustomed to the complexities of evaluating learning in and through the arts and did not attempt to collect evidence of learning against normative scales and indicators. It was not appropriate in this context to use a traditional pre/post test style testing for such relatively short encounters and with the diversity of experience, backgrounds and ages in any one group of children. Rather we developed a more a holistic approach to investigating learning, one that took into account the key ‘ingredients’ for learning, (Leadbeater, 2001:6), social and personal development, (Arts Education Partnership, 2004) and the “habits of mind learned in the study of an artform” (Project Zero, 2010:7). Learning encompasses knowledge, skills and “learning to learn” dispositions and evidence of positive approaches to learning are considered an outcome in themselves (Hyson, 2008: 23). Our position was that evidence of positive approaches to learning are in themselves a strong indicator of the effectiveness and value of an arts program.

Cultural CitizenshipCultural citizenship is a dynamic and multi-layered concept that refers to both elements of cultural learning and knowledge, and a way of living that embodies the civic principles of a communicative society (Stevenson, 1997 & 2003a). Re-conceptualisations of children, informed by rights-based discourses and a turn from dominant developmental frameworks to the ‘sociologies of childhood’(Lee, 2005), have engendered a complex and dynamic view of the nexus between children, the arts, culture and citizenship. Children are now acknowledged as current rather than future active participants and as competent interpreters of the world (Cobb, Danby & Farrell, 2005; Drury, 2006). This transformative view of children, moving from a dependent and deficit perspective to one where they are considered capable and entitled, underpins a conception of children as cultural citizens. Starting from this position, we have further refined our interpretations of cultural citizenship in light of practice-centred inquiries at ArtPlay. The interconnected, two-strand analysis examined workshop and consultation practices. As a result we identified a number of factors present in the workshops (Table 2) that enable children as cultural citizens.

Enabling factors for cultural citizenship

•accessingculturalcapitalanddiverseculturalknowledgethrough direct encounters with artists

•imaginingandcreatingculturalproductsandculturalknowledge

•developingculturaltoolsandcommunicativecapacities

•criticallyengagingwithculturallearningandknowledge

•activelyparticipatingincommunity-connectingactivities

Table 2: Enabling Factors for Cultural Citizenship

33

Artists Working with ChildrenA large and growing body of research has investigated arts partnerships involving artists and young people in both education and community-based contexts. Research into partnerships between artists, arts organisations and schools has primarily focused on partnership structure, teacher training and student outcomes (Fiske, 1999; Catteral, 2002; Catteral and Waldorf, 1999; Hunter, 2005; Horowitz, 2004; Galton, 2008; Imms, Jeanneret & Stevens-Ballenger, 2012). Concurrently to this work a growing interest in the impact of arts on social and community engagement has led to a body of research focused on artists working in non-school community contexts (Brice-Heath,Soep & Roach, 1998; Mulligan & Smith, 2009; Bamford, 2006; Reiss & Pringle, 2003). Within these studies the significant role of artists is often cited but rarely researched in any depth except for a few notable exceptions (Waldorf, 2003; Galton, 2008; Pringle, 2002; Brice-Heath and Wolf, 2005; Rabkin, Reynolds, Hedberg, & Shelby, 2011). These studies have identified a number of artist roles including, modelling, communicator, co-learner and collaborator, scaffolder and creativity generator (Pringle, 2002; Barkl, 2006; Galton, 2008; Brice-Heath & Wolf, 2005). In the large-scale Teacher Artist research led by Rabkin the authors make the strong claim that “Teaching artists teaching strategies are aligned with what experts agree are

34

the principles of good teaching (Rabkin, Reynolds, Hedberg, & Shelby, 2011: 2). Several studies have also pointed to the significance of the emotional connection between artists and young people (Galton, 2008; Barkl, 2006; Parks, 1992). This survey of roles associated with artist practices involving young people highlights, as Pringle notes, “a picture of a particular form of creative practice, which is extremely complex and sophisticated and involves the artists simultaneously adopting a range of different roles while taking a variety of approaches to engaging with participants” (2002:10).

What this review of the literature has uncovered is that whilst artists are commonly noted as a significant contributor to the social and educational outcomes of arts experiences involving young people, this contribution has rarely been the primary focus of research. What is missing from the reporting of these larger studies is sufficient information on interplay between the backgrounds and beliefs of artists, their areas of artistic expertise, the age of the young people they work with and the contexts in which they work. Taking these factors into account enables a more multi-dimensional and complex reading of why artists work with children and how they do so.

105

Learning The nature of short-term, community-based programs involving irregular users whose backgrounds are unknown can confound attempts to provide systematic evidence of development and attainment. We are accustomed to the complexities of evaluating learning in and through the arts and did not attempt to collect evidence of learning against normative scales and indicators. It was not appropriate in this context to use a traditional pre/post test style testing for such relatively short encounters and with the diversity of experience, backgrounds and ages in any one group of children. Rather we developed a more a holistic approach to investigating learning, one that took into account the key ‘ingredients’ for learning, (Leadbeater, 2001:6), social and personal development, (Arts Education Partnership, 2004) and the “habits of mind learned in the study of an artform” (Project Zero, 2010:7). Learning encompasses knowledge, skills and “learning to learn” dispositions and evidence of positive approaches to learning are considered an outcome in themselves (Hyson, 2008: 23). Our position was that evidence of positive approaches to learning are in themselves a strong indicator of the effectiveness and value of an arts program.

Cultural CitizenshipCultural citizenship is a dynamic and multi-layered concept that refers to both elements of cultural learning and knowledge, and a way of living that embodies the civic principles of a communicative society (Stevenson, 1997 & 2003a). Re-conceptualisations of children, informed by rights-based discourses and a turn from dominant developmental frameworks to the ‘sociologies of childhood’(Lee, 2005), have engendered a complex and dynamic view of the nexus between children, the arts, culture and citizenship. Children are now acknowledged as current rather than future active participants and as competent interpreters of the world (Cobb, Danby & Farrell, 2005; Drury, 2006). This transformative view of children, moving from a dependent and deficit perspective to one where they are considered capable and entitled, underpins a conception of children as cultural citizens. Starting from this position, we have further refined our interpretations of cultural citizenship in light of practice-centred inquiries at ArtPlay. The interconnected, two-strand analysis examined workshop and consultation practices. As a result we identified a number of factors present in the workshops (Table 2) that enable children as cultural citizens.

Enabling factors for cultural citizenship

•accessingculturalcapitalanddiverseculturalknowledgethrough direct encounters with artists

•imaginingandcreatingculturalproductsandculturalknowledge

•developingculturaltoolsandcommunicativecapacities

•criticallyengagingwithculturallearningandknowledge

•activelyparticipatingincommunity-connectingactivities

Table 2: Enabling Factors for Cultural Citizenship

33

Artists Working with ChildrenA large and growing body of research has investigated arts partnerships involving artists and young people in both education and community-based contexts. Research into partnerships between artists, arts organisations and schools has primarily focused on partnership structure, teacher training and student outcomes (Fiske, 1999; Catteral, 2002; Catteral and Waldorf, 1999; Hunter, 2005; Horowitz, 2004; Galton, 2008; Imms, Jeanneret & Stevens-Ballenger, 2012). Concurrently to this work a growing interest in the impact of arts on social and community engagement has led to a body of research focused on artists working in non-school community contexts (Brice-Heath,Soep & Roach, 1998; Mulligan & Smith, 2009; Bamford, 2006; Reiss & Pringle, 2003). Within these studies the significant role of artists is often cited but rarely researched in any depth except for a few notable exceptions (Waldorf, 2003; Galton, 2008; Pringle, 2002; Brice-Heath and Wolf, 2005; Rabkin, Reynolds, Hedberg, & Shelby, 2011). These studies have identified a number of artist roles including, modelling, communicator, co-learner and collaborator, scaffolder and creativity generator (Pringle, 2002; Barkl, 2006; Galton, 2008; Brice-Heath & Wolf, 2005). In the large-scale Teacher Artist research led by Rabkin the authors make the strong claim that “Teaching artists teaching strategies are aligned with what experts agree are

34

the principles of good teaching (Rabkin, Reynolds, Hedberg, & Shelby, 2011: 2). Several studies have also pointed to the significance of the emotional connection between artists and young people (Galton, 2008; Barkl, 2006; Parks, 1992). This survey of roles associated with artist practices involving young people highlights, as Pringle notes, “a picture of a particular form of creative practice, which is extremely complex and sophisticated and involves the artists simultaneously adopting a range of different roles while taking a variety of approaches to engaging with participants” (2002:10).

What this review of the literature has uncovered is that whilst artists are commonly noted as a significant contributor to the social and educational outcomes of arts experiences involving young people, this contribution has rarely been the primary focus of research. What is missing from the reporting of these larger studies is sufficient information on interplay between the backgrounds and beliefs of artists, their areas of artistic expertise, the age of the young people they work with and the contexts in which they work. Taking these factors into account enables a more multi-dimensional and complex reading of why artists work with children and how they do so.

106

Experience, practice and theoryWe immersed ourselves at the site to describe, explain and interpret what the experience at ArtPlay was from the perspectives of children, parents, artists, teachers and the staff. Opportunities for exchange were generated by this immersion, ones where we sought and shared thoughts with the participants. Many informal exchanges brought about co-reflection and a clear line of communication of value to both the participants and us. We have also contributed to the more formal processes with ArtPlay which has included sharing information at staff meetings and the development of planning documents and family forums. This commitment to periodic feedback and generating exchange was important in maintaining a direct relationship with the participants, one in which they felt informed and valued. Importantly, it has contributed to the development of a research-informed culture at ArtPlay that has a layered reflective practice underpinned by practice-led theory.

This on-going productive exchange has generated multiple grant applications and fed into program and policy development at ArtPlay. One significant outcome from the partnership between ArtPlay and The University of Melbourne has been the design, implementation and evaluation of the ACCESS Program, funded by the Australia Council for the Arts5. The continuous learning from the partnership has led to broad-ranging outcomes and relationships, including a significant number of publications and presentations given locally, nationally and internationally, research input into program and policy development, and a number of research partnership activities including the involvement of University of Melbourne students (Figure 8). Throughout this process of ‘representing’ the research, ArtPlay staff and artists have been engaged as co-writers and co-presenters, a position that mirrored other participatory processes inherent in the research and signifying the emphasis given to relationship-building, co-reflection and co-ownership throughout the project. In summary the research has evolved through cyclic and inter-dependent processes including, immersion, exchange and representation reflected in Figure 7.

Immersion Exchange

Progressive Focussing

Representation

Interpret Re-interpret

Map arepresentative

sample of ArtPlayprograms

Map furtheridentifiedArtPlay

programs

Augmenta whole of

organisationresearch informed

culture

ObserveListen

ReflectCo-construct

CommunicateCritique

Figure 7: Experience, practice and theory

35


36


Artist Exchange

Learning Lounge




























ACE Colloquium 2010





Artists

ResearchGrants


TeachingTate Papers






Research Reports


Book chapters

Mapping South


Publications

Conferences



education fora


107

Experience, practice and theoryWe immersed ourselves at the site to describe, explain and interpret what the experience at ArtPlay was from the perspectives of children, parents, artists, teachers and the staff. Opportunities for exchange were generated by this immersion, ones where we sought and shared thoughts with the participants. Many informal exchanges brought about co-reflection and a clear line of communication of value to both the participants and us. We have also contributed to the more formal processes with ArtPlay which has included sharing information at staff meetings and the development of planning documents and family forums. This commitment to periodic feedback and generating exchange was important in maintaining a direct relationship with the participants, one in which they felt informed and valued. Importantly, it has contributed to the development of a research-informed culture at ArtPlay that has a layered reflective practice underpinned by practice-led theory.

This on-going productive exchange has generated multiple grant applications and fed into program and policy development at ArtPlay. One significant outcome from the partnership between ArtPlay and The University of Melbourne has been the design, implementation and evaluation of the ACCESS Program, funded by the Australia Council for the Arts5. The continuous learning from the partnership has led to broad-ranging outcomes and relationships, including a significant number of publications and presentations given locally, nationally and internationally, research input into program and policy development, and a number of research partnership activities including the involvement of University of Melbourne students (Figure 8). Throughout this process of ‘representing’ the research, ArtPlay staff and artists have been engaged as co-writers and co-presenters, a position that mirrored other participatory processes inherent in the research and signifying the emphasis given to relationship-building, co-reflection and co-ownership throughout the project. In summary the research has evolved through cyclic and inter-dependent processes including, immersion, exchange and representation reflected in Figure 7.

Immersion Exchange

Progressive Focussing

Representation

Interpret Re-interpret

Map arepresentative

sample of ArtPlayprograms

Map furtheridentifiedArtPlay

programs

Augmenta whole of

organisationresearch informed

culture

ObserveListen

ReflectCo-construct

CommunicateCritique

Figure 7: Experience, practice and theory

35


36


Artist Exchange

Learning Lounge




























ACE Colloquium 2010





Artists

ResearchGrants


TeachingTate Papers






Research Reports


Book chapters

Mapping South


Publications

Conferences



education fora


108





































37

Bibliography

38




































109





































37

Bibliography

38




































11039






































40

Preschool Workshops

Artists Participants Duration Artform Age group

Coming Closer Boori, Dominic & Victoria

16 children with parents

One-off 2 hours

multi-form with story telling, dance & visual arts

Under 6

Playscapes Kath & Sian 20 children with parents

One-off 45 minutes

visual arts & craft 6 & under

Pocketfool for Preschoolers Jen & Heidi 20 children with parents

One-off 1 hour

multiform: drama Under 5

Preschool Jam Nico & Martin 17 children with parents

One-off 1 hour

music Under 5

Microscope drawing and dancing

Briony & Gregory 17 children with parents

One-off 1 hour

science/visual arts/dance

Under 6

Public Workshops – 6-12 years


Men of Steel. Object Theatre.

Tamara & Sam 19 One-off 2 hours

puppetry/theatre 6-9

In the Studio Jessica 10 One-off 2 hours

visual arts: sculpture

7 -9

Homage to Nolan Edna 12 One-off 3 hours

visual arts: painting and mixed-media

6 – 12

What if Dance? Mia & Thaila 25 One-off 2 hours

dance/creative movement

4-7

Shadow Play Lynne 20 Drop-In puppetry & visual arts

5-8

School Workshops Artists Participants Duration Artform Age group

Rajasthani Potters Giri Raj Prasad & Manori Lal

20 One-off 4 hours

visual arts: ceramics 10-12

Accessories Ricardo & Claudia 24 One-off 4 hours x 2 days

visual arts: jewellery 10 -12

Performance Drawing Zhen 15 One-off 4 hours x 2 days

visual arts: digital and collaborative drawing

9-12

Animask Heri 20 One-off 4 hours x 2 days

visual arts: puppetry 10-12

Drawing to Music Linda 25 One-off 4 hours x 2 days

visual arts: drawing and music

9-10

Portraits and Book Making Marianne 26 One-off 4 hours x 2 days

visual arts: drawing and book making

11 -12

Long-term Workshops


ArtPlay MSO Ensemble Gillian 20-25 3 x 2 all day workshops

Music 8 -13

ArtPlay Puppet Troupe Rebecca & Ken 13 4 x all day workshop

Visual Theatre/ Puppetry

8 -13

Appendix The 18 ArtPlay Workshops used for in-depth examination

11139






































40

Preschool Workshops


Coming Closer Boori, Dominic & Victoria

16 children with parents

One-off 2 hours

multi-form with story telling, dance & visual arts

Under 6

Playscapes Kath & Sian 20 children with parents

One-off 45 minutes

visual arts & craft 6 & under

Pocketfool for Preschoolers Jen & Heidi 20 children with parents

One-off 1 hour

multiform: drama Under 5

Preschool Jam Nico & Martin 17 children with parents

One-off 1 hour

music Under 5

Microscope drawing and dancing

Briony & Gregory 17 children with parents

One-off 1 hour

science/visual arts/dance

Under 6

Public Workshops – 6-12 years


Men of Steel. Object Theatre.

Tamara & Sam 19 One-off 2 hours

puppetry/theatre 6-9

In the Studio Jessica 10 One-off 2 hours

visual arts: sculpture

7 -9

Homage to Nolan Edna 12 One-off 3 hours

visual arts: painting and mixed-media

6 – 12

What if Dance? Mia & Thaila 25 One-off 2 hours

dance/creative movement

4-7

Shadow Play Lynne 20 Drop-In puppetry & visual arts

5-8

School Workshops Artists Participants Duration Artform Age group

Rajasthani Potters Giri Raj Prasad & Manori Lal

20 One-off 4 hours

visual arts: ceramics 10-12

Accessories Ricardo & Claudia 24 One-off 4 hours x 2 days

visual arts: jewellery 10 -12

Performance Drawing Zhen 15 One-off 4 hours x 2 days

visual arts: digital and collaborative drawing

9-12

Animask Heri 20 One-off 4 hours x 2 days

visual arts: puppetry 10-12

Drawing to Music Linda 25 One-off 4 hours x 2 days

visual arts: drawing and music

9-10

Portraits and Book Making Marianne 26 One-off 4 hours x 2 days

visual arts: drawing and book making

11 -12

Long-term Workshops


ArtPlay MSO Ensemble Gillian 20-25 3 x 2 all day workshops

Music 8 -13

ArtPlay Puppet Troupe Rebecca & Ken 13 4 x all day workshop

Visual Theatre/ Puppetry

8 -13

Appendix The 18 ArtPlay Workshops used for in-depth examination

112

PRESCHOOL PROGRAMS

Pocketfool for Preschoolers (Theatre arts) As a result of a successful grants-funded program, ArtPlay scheduled Pocketfool for Preschoolers as a regular monthly public program. The artists, Jennifer and Heidi, identified a need for more, what they termed, “original theatre” for young children. ArtPlay provided them with their first opportunity to develop their performance skills into interactive workshops for both children and their parents. The ‘Transport’ workshop combined theatrical and playful drama, music and visual arts experiences with children aged three to five and their parents. This artist-led, imaginative journey involved a series of short encounters that included a train, a boat, tigers, sea life hidden treasures, and culminated in the children and parents sharing a ride on a magic carpet.

Coming Closer Through Indigenous Story-telling (Story and visual art) Boori, an experienced Australian Indigenous storyteller and writer, led the Coming Closer workshop. It involved children aged three to six years, three younger siblings and twelve parents. Grant-funded, the workshop involved a partnership between the lead artist/storyteller and two experienced early years teachers, Dominic, a specialist in visual arts, and Victoria, a specialist in language and community publishing. The two-hour workshop began with storytelling that was physically enacted by the participants led by the artist, who also played a didgeridoo. The children were then invited to tables set up with black drawing media and areas for mono-printing and block printing led by Dominic. The children were encouraged to reflect on memorable aspects of the stories and represent these through their images. This series of workshops resulted in a community-published booklet, Coming Closer: Listen with your Heart, coordinated by Victoria.

Preschool Jam (Music) The two Irish artists, Nico and Martin, have worked extensively at The Ark in Dublin. This workshop involved children aged four to five years and their parent in forty-five minutes of playful, active and improvised music-making that culminated in a whole group ‘jam’. Throughout the workshop young children, with and without their parents, co-created and co-directed music making using angklungs, bells, whistles and other novel instruments.

I’ve run music workshops for people of all ages for a very long time. And I’ve always come back to children. I prefer to work with children, and I’ve developed a lot of workshop techniques that I can use for all ages. Nico

41 42

Playscapes (visual arts)This series of drop-in weekend workshops was undertaken outside the entrance of ArtPlay, led by two teaching artists, Kath and Sian, both experienced with working with young children. The environment was set up with several trestle tables laden with colourful felt and small buckets of water. Children were invited to explore and mould with felt making and clay activities. In addition to this, children had access to a range of felt, natural materials, small houses and play figures with which to construct personal, non-permanent play environments or ‘playscapes’ on nearby large boulders. Flexibly scheduled, the one hour ‘drop in’ session required the artists to re-introduce the activity as new families arrived, all the time focused on guiding the felt-construction experience of settled children. At any one time twenty children aged two to seven years were present, supported by parents, grandparents and guardians.

Microscope Drawing (Art/science)The promotional text for the workshop, Microscope Drawing reads, “Peek into the lens of a microscope and enter a tiny but vast world of mystery, wonder and scientific discovery”. The workshop began with a demonstration, led by a visual artist Briony and a scientist Greg, both dressed in laboratory coats. Running for one hour, this workshop involved three-to-five year olds, younger siblings and parents. Through the use of a magnifying device named ‘Cyclops’ and later a sophisticated microscope, the children were invited to “play at being scientists”, encouraged to view and self-scan a wide range of materials including their own hands, a strawberry, an ostrich feather, computer chip, coin, and handmade paper. Following this inquiry, Briony led the children in a line playfully through the space, whilst a magnified image of a live millipede was projected on a nearby screen. The children eventually settled at tables laid out with drawing materials, small magnifying glasses and photographs of microscopic forms that served as a reference for their drawings.

113

PRESCHOOL PROGRAMS

Pocketfool for Preschoolers (Theatre arts) As a result of a successful grants-funded program, ArtPlay scheduled Pocketfool for Preschoolers as a regular monthly public program. The artists, Jennifer and Heidi, identified a need for more, what they termed, “original theatre” for young children. ArtPlay provided them with their first opportunity to develop their performance skills into interactive workshops for both children and their parents. The ‘Transport’ workshop combined theatrical and playful drama, music and visual arts experiences with children aged three to five and their parents. This artist-led, imaginative journey involved a series of short encounters that included a train, a boat, tigers, sea life hidden treasures, and culminated in the children and parents sharing a ride on a magic carpet.

Coming Closer Through Indigenous Story-telling (Story and visual art) Boori, an experienced Australian Indigenous storyteller and writer, led the Coming Closer workshop. It involved children aged three to six years, three younger siblings and twelve parents. Grant-funded, the workshop involved a partnership between the lead artist/storyteller and two experienced early years teachers, Dominic, a specialist in visual arts, and Victoria, a specialist in language and community publishing. The two-hour workshop began with storytelling that was physically enacted by the participants led by the artist, who also played a didgeridoo. The children were then invited to tables set up with black drawing media and areas for mono-printing and block printing led by Dominic. The children were encouraged to reflect on memorable aspects of the stories and represent these through their images. This series of workshops resulted in a community-published booklet, Coming Closer: Listen with your Heart, coordinated by Victoria.

Preschool Jam (Music) The two Irish artists, Nico and Martin, have worked extensively at The Ark in Dublin. This workshop involved children aged four to five years and their parent in forty-five minutes of playful, active and improvised music-making that culminated in a whole group ‘jam’. Throughout the workshop young children, with and without their parents, co-created and co-directed music making using angklungs, bells, whistles and other novel instruments.

I’ve run music workshops for people of all ages for a very long time. And I’ve always come back to children. I prefer to work with children, and I’ve developed a lot of workshop techniques that I can use for all ages. Nico

41 42

Playscapes (visual arts)This series of drop-in weekend workshops was undertaken outside the entrance of ArtPlay, led by two teaching artists, Kath and Sian, both experienced with working with young children. The environment was set up with several trestle tables laden with colourful felt and small buckets of water. Children were invited to explore and mould with felt making and clay activities. In addition to this, children had access to a range of felt, natural materials, small houses and play figures with which to construct personal, non-permanent play environments or ‘playscapes’ on nearby large boulders. Flexibly scheduled, the one hour ‘drop in’ session required the artists to re-introduce the activity as new families arrived, all the time focused on guiding the felt-construction experience of settled children. At any one time twenty children aged two to seven years were present, supported by parents, grandparents and guardians.

Microscope Drawing (Art/science)The promotional text for the workshop, Microscope Drawing reads, “Peek into the lens of a microscope and enter a tiny but vast world of mystery, wonder and scientific discovery”. The workshop began with a demonstration, led by a visual artist Briony and a scientist Greg, both dressed in laboratory coats. Running for one hour, this workshop involved three-to-five year olds, younger siblings and parents. Through the use of a magnifying device named ‘Cyclops’ and later a sophisticated microscope, the children were invited to “play at being scientists”, encouraged to view and self-scan a wide range of materials including their own hands, a strawberry, an ostrich feather, computer chip, coin, and handmade paper. Following this inquiry, Briony led the children in a line playfully through the space, whilst a magnified image of a live millipede was projected on a nearby screen. The children eventually settled at tables laid out with drawing materials, small magnifying glasses and photographs of microscopic forms that served as a reference for their drawings.

114

PUBLIC PROGRAMS 6 – 13 YEAR OLDS

Homage to Nolan (Visual Arts - Painting) The Homage to Nolan workshop was programmed to link with a current and nearby retrospective public gallery exhibition of the artist Sydney Nolan. It ran for over two hours and involved a group of children aged from six to twelve years. Parents were in attendance, and to varying degrees, interacted with children to provide support. The workshop began with a slide show and discussion based on Nolan’s work with particular reference given to a series of paintings entitled the Ned Kelly series. To stimulate their own paintings the children were introduced to a few general painting and mixed-media methods evident in Nolan’s work. The remainder of the workshop centred on child-led painting and mixed media studies in a studio-like environment, where participants moved freely to collect materials and revisit computer based Nolan images. The workshop was led by Edna an experienced professional who had worked primarily in Israel in areas including arts therapy, educational resource development and integrated learning programs for both children and adults. The workshop ended gradually as participants completed their paintings.

What if… Dance? (Creative Dance) What if..Dance was a booked, two-hour weekend workshop that involving children aged four to six year olds, three of whom were boys. The workshop was facilitated by two experienced artists, Mia and Thaila, both who taught in an established creative dance school for children. The workshop began with non-threatening ice-breaking warm-ups that led into a number of short individual and group creative movement explorations, stimulated by large flexible tubes placed throughout the space. The two artists provided evocative and prompting music and modelled a variety of movements for the children to follow, all the time actively encouraging individual improvisation and group responsiveness to each other, and to the music. The young people rotated between being dancers and audience members throughout the workshop. Parents stayed on as observers with only two female parents actively participating. The workshop concluded with the artists inviting the children to reflect on the experience through the development of a ‘placement’ which involved creating small constructions, using aluminium foil, ribbons and other materials. These served as a reference for post-workshop reflection between children, families and artists.

43 44

Men of Steel (Puppetry/Theatre) Running for two hours, the Men of Steel workshop focused on creating ‘Object Theatre’ with a group of children aged six to nine years. The two lead artists, Tamara and Sam, were an experienced team who had devised and performed their own Object Theatre shows that had toured locally and internationally. The artists began the workshop by demonstrating how to develop characters and act out scenarios using everyday objects including metal biscuit-cutter stencils and a range of fruit and vegetables. Next the young people, grouped in pairs, worked behind waist-high plinths that served as platforms for them to develop and show their Object Theatre performances. Some parents stayed on to watch on the side, whilst others left, returning at the end of the session. The artists, supported by an ArtPlay staff member, watched and advised the children as they rehearsed their performances. The workshop concluded with a group showing of several short, playful and slapstick ‘object theatre’ pieces.

Shadow Play (Puppetry) Upon entering the Shadow Play workshop children aged five to eight years, and supporting adults, were led into a darkened space set up for shadow puppetry. Lynne, a puppet artist, experienced with working with children, began by playing with shadow puppets projected onto a large screen. Given some simple instructions and examples, children and their parents created simple shadow puppets using cardboard, rods and various drawing and collage materials. With no requirement to book, new families progressively arrived requiring Lynne to give a series of rolling introductions and instructions. Throughout the workshop she and the ArtPlay staff roamed to encourage and guide, though most children and families were largely self-reliant. The workshop culminated with children returning to the darkened room to play with torches and their created puppets which were projected onto a large screen or on the inside walls of small domed tents. The children co-played with other children and their parents for some time. Participants stayed from forty-five to ninety minutes, with attendance ranging from eight to sixteen children at any one time.

115

PUBLIC PROGRAMS 6 – 13 YEAR OLDS

Homage to Nolan (Visual Arts - Painting) The Homage to Nolan workshop was programmed to link with a current and nearby retrospective public gallery exhibition of the artist Sydney Nolan. It ran for over two hours and involved a group of children aged from six to twelve years. Parents were in attendance, and to varying degrees, interacted with children to provide support. The workshop began with a slide show and discussion based on Nolan’s work with particular reference given to a series of paintings entitled the Ned Kelly series. To stimulate their own paintings the children were introduced to a few general painting and mixed-media methods evident in Nolan’s work. The remainder of the workshop centred on child-led painting and mixed media studies in a studio-like environment, where participants moved freely to collect materials and revisit computer based Nolan images. The workshop was led by Edna an experienced professional who had worked primarily in Israel in areas including arts therapy, educational resource development and integrated learning programs for both children and adults. The workshop ended gradually as participants completed their paintings.

What if… Dance? (Creative Dance) What if..Dance was a booked, two-hour weekend workshop that involving children aged four to six year olds, three of whom were boys. The workshop was facilitated by two experienced artists, Mia and Thaila, both who taught in an established creative dance school for children. The workshop began with non-threatening ice-breaking warm-ups that led into a number of short individual and group creative movement explorations, stimulated by large flexible tubes placed throughout the space. The two artists provided evocative and prompting music and modelled a variety of movements for the children to follow, all the time actively encouraging individual improvisation and group responsiveness to each other, and to the music. The young people rotated between being dancers and audience members throughout the workshop. Parents stayed on as observers with only two female parents actively participating. The workshop concluded with the artists inviting the children to reflect on the experience through the development of a ‘placement’ which involved creating small constructions, using aluminium foil, ribbons and other materials. These served as a reference for post-workshop reflection between children, families and artists.

43 44

Men of Steel (Puppetry/Theatre) Running for two hours, the Men of Steel workshop focused on creating ‘Object Theatre’ with a group of children aged six to nine years. The two lead artists, Tamara and Sam, were an experienced team who had devised and performed their own Object Theatre shows that had toured locally and internationally. The artists began the workshop by demonstrating how to develop characters and act out scenarios using everyday objects including metal biscuit-cutter stencils and a range of fruit and vegetables. Next the young people, grouped in pairs, worked behind waist-high plinths that served as platforms for them to develop and show their Object Theatre performances. Some parents stayed on to watch on the side, whilst others left, returning at the end of the session. The artists, supported by an ArtPlay staff member, watched and advised the children as they rehearsed their performances. The workshop concluded with a group showing of several short, playful and slapstick ‘object theatre’ pieces.

Shadow Play (Puppetry) Upon entering the Shadow Play workshop children aged five to eight years, and supporting adults, were led into a darkened space set up for shadow puppetry. Lynne, a puppet artist, experienced with working with children, began by playing with shadow puppets projected onto a large screen. Given some simple instructions and examples, children and their parents created simple shadow puppets using cardboard, rods and various drawing and collage materials. With no requirement to book, new families progressively arrived requiring Lynne to give a series of rolling introductions and instructions. Throughout the workshop she and the ArtPlay staff roamed to encourage and guide, though most children and families were largely self-reliant. The workshop culminated with children returning to the darkened room to play with torches and their created puppets which were projected onto a large screen or on the inside walls of small domed tents. The children co-played with other children and their parents for some time. Participants stayed from forty-five to ninety minutes, with attendance ranging from eight to sixteen children at any one time.

116

In the Studio (Visual arts - Construction) The promotion for the In the Studio workshop read,

Make animals from paper and cardboard with contemporary visual artist and sculptor Jessica New. This hands-on family workshop will teach you how to shape new and recycled paper materials into your own animal kingdom friends to take home!

The two-hour workshop, on a Saturday morning, involved children aged from seven to nine years. Parents were required to be present and most actively supported their children’s art-making. The artist Jessica, a final year university student studying sculpture, who had never undertaken a practical workshop with children before, began by showing images of her work. Following this, with assistance from an ArtPlay staff member, she introduced the children to a collection of animal head templates and a few construction techniques. Next the children moved to a large open space set up with four tables and began, with the help of their parent and the ArtPlay staff member, to create three-dimensional animal head forms, based largely on the templates provided. Set up nearby was a collection of materials including, coloured thin card, stiff paper and collage materials available for self access. For most of the workshop Jessica remained stationed at a separate table, managing the use of a hot-glue gun and advising children, as needed, on how best to join materials together. Throughout the workshop the children, actively aided by their parent, worked solidly to create and decorate their animal forms.

45 46

SCHOOLS PROGRAM

Rajasthani Potters (Visual arts - pottery) Set up in a stage-like configuration, the Rajasthani Potters workshop began with the students sitting in a wide arc facing the traditionally-dressed artists sitting on the floor. The artists sat on the floor with two aged and non-mechanical stone wheels before them and a display of their pottery behind. This all day workshop, run by two Indian potters, Giri Raj Prasad and Manori Lal, involved students aged ten-twelve years. Using age-old traditional methods the two potters demonstrated their pottery skills before inviting students to co-create pots with them. One of the artists Prasadi said that, the pottery that the children have done today, it’s been printed in their minds and they’ll take it back with them, and it’s a different feeling when someone comes from India to Australia that’s like eight thousand kilometres far, and they’re treating them like a family and they’ll have this thing in their minds forever and ever. Later in the workshop the students generated designs to inscribe on their pots that were fired several days later as part of a public kiln-firing event. The students came from an inner-Melbourne school with many students belonging to immigrant families from South-East Asia. The students were supported by their classroom teacher Pam, and by a social welfare aid Caroline, who saw that her role as supporting the students who have a “high need linguistically and culturally”. Whist the students live in a nearby suburb but as noted by one the teachers “they rarely come into the city and rarely venture outside of their community and cultural group”.

AniMask (puppetry)Animask involved two four-hour workshops spaced three weeks apart. With reference to his own childhood art experiences, the Indonesian puppetry artist Heri introduced himself to the children,

Good morning everyone... When I was a kid I liked art. In my parent’s house we didn’t have money so we had to create ourselves from our imaginations. You can create anything as long as you have imagination.

The task Heri set for the students was to create masks that symbolised political, environmental and or social issues. For example two girls created a face with one side symbolising water and the other representing Africa. In the second week students further developed their mask and constructed shadow puppets that were used in a culminating group student shadow play. Students participated aged ten to twelve years. Two teachers and the ArtPlay South Kids coordinator supported this workshop.

117

In the Studio (Visual arts - Construction) The promotion for the In the Studio workshop read,

Make animals from paper and cardboard with contemporary visual artist and sculptor Jessica New. This hands-on family workshop will teach you how to shape new and recycled paper materials into your own animal kingdom friends to take home!

The two-hour workshop, on a Saturday morning, involved children aged from seven to nine years. Parents were required to be present and most actively supported their children’s art-making. The artist Jessica, a final year university student studying sculpture, who had never undertaken a practical workshop with children before, began by showing images of her work. Following this, with assistance from an ArtPlay staff member, she introduced the children to a collection of animal head templates and a few construction techniques. Next the children moved to a large open space set up with four tables and began, with the help of their parent and the ArtPlay staff member, to create three-dimensional animal head forms, based largely on the templates provided. Set up nearby was a collection of materials including, coloured thin card, stiff paper and collage materials available for self access. For most of the workshop Jessica remained stationed at a separate table, managing the use of a hot-glue gun and advising children, as needed, on how best to join materials together. Throughout the workshop the children, actively aided by their parent, worked solidly to create and decorate their animal forms.

45 46

SCHOOLS PROGRAM

Rajasthani Potters (Visual arts - pottery) Set up in a stage-like configuration, the Rajasthani Potters workshop began with the students sitting in a wide arc facing the traditionally-dressed artists sitting on the floor. The artists sat on the floor with two aged and non-mechanical stone wheels before them and a display of their pottery behind. This all day workshop, run by two Indian potters, Giri Raj Prasad and Manori Lal, involved students aged ten-twelve years. Using age-old traditional methods the two potters demonstrated their pottery skills before inviting students to co-create pots with them. One of the artists Prasadi said that, the pottery that the children have done today, it’s been printed in their minds and they’ll take it back with them, and it’s a different feeling when someone comes from India to Australia that’s like eight thousand kilometres far, and they’re treating them like a family and they’ll have this thing in their minds forever and ever. Later in the workshop the students generated designs to inscribe on their pots that were fired several days later as part of a public kiln-firing event. The students came from an inner-Melbourne school with many students belonging to immigrant families from South-East Asia. The students were supported by their classroom teacher Pam, and by a social welfare aid Caroline, who saw that her role as supporting the students who have a “high need linguistically and culturally”. Whist the students live in a nearby suburb but as noted by one the teachers “they rarely come into the city and rarely venture outside of their community and cultural group”.

AniMask (puppetry)Animask involved two four-hour workshops spaced three weeks apart. With reference to his own childhood art experiences, the Indonesian puppetry artist Heri introduced himself to the children,

Good morning everyone... When I was a kid I liked art. In my parent’s house we didn’t have money so we had to create ourselves from our imaginations. You can create anything as long as you have imagination.

The task Heri set for the students was to create masks that symbolised political, environmental and or social issues. For example two girls created a face with one side symbolising water and the other representing Africa. In the second week students further developed their mask and constructed shadow puppets that were used in a culminating group student shadow play. Students participated aged ten to twelve years. Two teachers and the ArtPlay South Kids coordinator supported this workshop.

118

Walka Accessories (Visual arts) The Walka Accessories program involved young people aged ten-twelve years (thirteen male and nine female) and their teachers in two four-hour workshops spaced three weeks apart. Led by two international Chile-born artists, Ricardo and Claudia, these workshops focused on the design and construction of both individual and group jewellery making activities using recycled materials. The workshop was supported by the ArtPlay South Kids and Big Draw coordinators. A strong focus of these workshops was engaging the students in a similar process of design adopted by the artists which a teacher thought was, “probably more engaging to kids than anything else”. The students participating in this workshop came from an outer-Melbourne suburban school. One of their teachers felt the students were not exposed to diverse cultures in their local communities and thus coming to ArtPlay and the city helps to “break down” established and potentially narrow viewpoints.

Performance Drawing (Visual arts) This workshop was led by a young Australian performance drawing artist Zhen, who first completed a Fine Art degree, and more recently, teacher education training. She has decided not to teach full time because she, “could not live without art”. Her program, undertaken over two whole days, spaced several weeks apart, involved the development of a large accumulative and temporal whole group charcoal drawing that was documented through stop motion photography. Concurrently to this activity students created portraits of peers using digital drawing tablets. This workshop was supported by the ArtPlay Big Draw coordinator.

A group of students from three grade levels, were involved in the workshop including students aged nine to twelve years of age. The older children had been to ArtPlay before. A teacher Stacey noted that the students responded positively to ArtPlay because,

The room is so large and they get plenty of room. They can run around. They’ve got two different activities amongst the time that they’re doing, so they can go from one to the other. They can make plenty of mess, and they don’t have to worry about it, and they really are enjoying the whole environment that they’re in.

47

Big Draw: Drawing to Music (Multi-arts) In this workshop the artist Linda, self-described as an experienced ‘teaching artist’ led a group of students aged nine-ten year, through two four-hour workshops spaced several weeks apart. The students, supported by two teachers, came from an outer Melbourne primary school. Introduced by the artist as “chaotic play” the students were involved in a diverse range of abstract-orientated drawing experiences, some of which were created in response to music and movement. In the second workshop the group viewed a kinetic art exhibition in a nearby public gallery. The nature of the workshop aligned with the goals of Big Draw coordinator Greg who valued opportunities to engage students “physically” in unrestrained drawing and in experiences that promoted an inquiry into the “materiality” of art media.

Big Draw: Portraits and Bookmaking (visual arts) This program involved three all day workshops, undertaken several weeks apart, the tasks set for students included the construction of personal sketch books, small self-portrait drawing and finally large composite drawings, created both individually, in small groups and finally as one whole group. The group comprised of boys aged eleven to twelve years who were supported by two teachers, Patricia and Melanie and the Big Draw coordinator. The Melbourne artist Marianne described herself as a painter who has become interested in drawing-based animation. She saw her goals for the workshop being more about “shifting the way the students were perceiving” rather than assessing the “graphic quality of their work”.

The students were enrolled in a boys-only privately funded school located in central Melbourne. Their teacher Patricia considers the school “fortunate” and “with excellent facilities”. Whilst the school provides extensive opportunities to study the arts, as Patricia continues to note,

Coming here exposes the students, a smaller group admittedly, to working a professional artist, in a much closer proximity and in a completely different situation, and that’s what I think is so important.

48

119

Walka Accessories (Visual arts) The Walka Accessories program involved young people aged ten-twelve years (thirteen male and nine female) and their teachers in two four-hour workshops spaced three weeks apart. Led by two international Chile-born artists, Ricardo and Claudia, these workshops focused on the design and construction of both individual and group jewellery making activities using recycled materials. The workshop was supported by the ArtPlay South Kids and Big Draw coordinators. A strong focus of these workshops was engaging the students in a similar process of design adopted by the artists which a teacher thought was, “probably more engaging to kids than anything else”. The students participating in this workshop came from an outer-Melbourne suburban school. One of their teachers felt the students were not exposed to diverse cultures in their local communities and thus coming to ArtPlay and the city helps to “break down” established and potentially narrow viewpoints.

Performance Drawing (Visual arts) This workshop was led by a young Australian performance drawing artist Zhen, who first completed a Fine Art degree, and more recently, teacher education training. She has decided not to teach full time because she, “could not live without art”. Her program, undertaken over two whole days, spaced several weeks apart, involved the development of a large accumulative and temporal whole group charcoal drawing that was documented through stop motion photography. Concurrently to this activity students created portraits of peers using digital drawing tablets. This workshop was supported by the ArtPlay Big Draw coordinator.

A group of students from three grade levels, were involved in the workshop including students aged nine to twelve years of age. The older children had been to ArtPlay before. A teacher Stacey noted that the students responded positively to ArtPlay because,

The room is so large and they get plenty of room. They can run around. They’ve got two different activities amongst the time that they’re doing, so they can go from one to the other. They can make plenty of mess, and they don’t have to worry about it, and they really are enjoying the whole environment that they’re in.

47

Big Draw: Drawing to Music (Multi-arts) In this workshop the artist Linda, self-described as an experienced ‘teaching artist’ led a group of students aged nine-ten year, through two four-hour workshops spaced several weeks apart. The students, supported by two teachers, came from an outer Melbourne primary school. Introduced by the artist as “chaotic play” the students were involved in a diverse range of abstract-orientated drawing experiences, some of which were created in response to music and movement. In the second workshop the group viewed a kinetic art exhibition in a nearby public gallery. The nature of the workshop aligned with the goals of Big Draw coordinator Greg who valued opportunities to engage students “physically” in unrestrained drawing and in experiences that promoted an inquiry into the “materiality” of art media.

Big Draw: Portraits and Bookmaking (visual arts) This program involved three all day workshops, undertaken several weeks apart, the tasks set for students included the construction of personal sketch books, small self-portrait drawing and finally large composite drawings, created both individually, in small groups and finally as one whole group. The group comprised of boys aged eleven to twelve years who were supported by two teachers, Patricia and Melanie and the Big Draw coordinator. The Melbourne artist Marianne described herself as a painter who has become interested in drawing-based animation. She saw her goals for the workshop being more about “shifting the way the students were perceiving” rather than assessing the “graphic quality of their work”.

The students were enrolled in a boys-only privately funded school located in central Melbourne. Their teacher Patricia considers the school “fortunate” and “with excellent facilities”. Whilst the school provides extensive opportunities to study the arts, as Patricia continues to note,

Coming here exposes the students, a smaller group admittedly, to working a professional artist, in a much closer proximity and in a completely different situation, and that’s what I think is so important.

48

120

LONGTERM PROGRAMS

ArtPlay Puppet Troupe (visual theatre / puppetry) Over a period of three years a core group of young people, aged seven to thirteen years, became regular subscribers to the visual theatre/puppetry programs led by Ken and Rebecca, and came to be known as the ArtPlay Puppet Troupe. Each annual program involved a small group of up to thirteen young people, who participated in up to five 4-6 hour workshops, undertaken either intensively over several consecutive days or spaced several weeks apart, scheduled during non-school periods. Engaged as apprentices to the two artists, who acted as directors and mentors, young people co-scripted, co-created and co-presented evocative and professional public performances such as The Man who Loved Boxes. The central ambition of this program, as noted by Rebecca, was to Rebecca, “to take them through the process that we [artists] would go through if we were devising a piece of work.”The artists were responsible for generating open and provocative ‘big’ topics for inquiry, and pre-planned how such topics may be developed, for example through black theatre or shadow theatre. In The Man who Loved Boxes workshop the artists encouraged the young people to develop ideas and themes that were ‘unexpected’, ‘carefree’ and ‘whimsical’.

When asked about the experience of working with the artists the young puppetry artists put forth comments such as “you have to think about it and focus’ and “they [the artists] talk you through it, let it sit in your mind, what to do. If you forget it, they don’t get angry, they just say, ‘oh ok, this is what you do.”

49

ArtPlay Melbourne Symphony Orchestra Ensemble (music) Initiated by ArtPlay Creative Producer, Simon Spain and musician Gillian, who at the time was the Education Officer for the MSO, this program has now run for eight years (2004-2011) with a new group formed each year. The Ensemble program has involved three-to-four two-day workshops, spread three months apart in the school holidays, with new groups formed each year. Each two-day workshop involves the creation of a piece of music inspired by a piece from a current MSO concert program available to the children. Gillian chooses a piece she feels has elements that can form the basis of a collaborative composition by the children. The first day (10:00am-3:30pm) is usually based at the Iwaki Auditorium, home of the Melbourne Symphony Orchestra in the ABC Centre. Over the two days, there is a mixture of small and whole group work. With no more than six, the children are periodically clustered into sub-groups to work on components of the final work. Depending on the MSO musicians involved, the instruments played by the children and their expertise, these groups could consist of an orchestral grouping like strings, or an instrumental mix. Led by a MSO musician, each group works in a separate rehearsal space spread throughout the complex. Gillian moves from whole-group leader to roving between groups, actively supporting and facilitating. The following day the workshop moves to ArtPlay, with Gillian clearly positioned as the musical director. Most of the day is spent on further development of the parts that are progressively linked and layered with each other to form a multi-sectioned composition and rehearsing in readiness for a final performance in front of families and friends. The children return again in a few months to work on another improvised composition stimulated by another composer featured in the MSO program.

I try to take them through a process that is exactly what the musicians [professionals] would do. I give them the same task and questions [as the musicians]. They nut out how to make the piece work among themselves. The process itself is authentic, and it has applications across a really wide sphere. I hope that the skills that they learn, the way they approach that problem solving is creative and honest. It’s not about imposing the quickest and easiest solution, but really trying to kind of nut out what’s needed, what’s required or what’s wanted, and struggling with that, you know, they struggle and they see musicians struggling. That’s what I aim for in the projects. That’s what I think is the art of ensemble

50

121

LONGTERM PROGRAMS

ArtPlay Puppet Troupe (visual theatre / puppetry) Over a period of three years a core group of young people, aged seven to thirteen years, became regular subscribers to the visual theatre/puppetry programs led by Ken and Rebecca, and came to be known as the ArtPlay Puppet Troupe. Each annual program involved a small group of up to thirteen young people, who participated in up to five 4-6 hour workshops, undertaken either intensively over several consecutive days or spaced several weeks apart, scheduled during non-school periods. Engaged as apprentices to the two artists, who acted as directors and mentors, young people co-scripted, co-created and co-presented evocative and professional public performances such as The Man who Loved Boxes. The central ambition of this program, as noted by Rebecca, was to Rebecca, “to take them through the process that we [artists] would go through if we were devising a piece of work.”The artists were responsible for generating open and provocative ‘big’ topics for inquiry, and pre-planned how such topics may be developed, for example through black theatre or shadow theatre. In The Man who Loved Boxes workshop the artists encouraged the young people to develop ideas and themes that were ‘unexpected’, ‘carefree’ and ‘whimsical’.

When asked about the experience of working with the artists the young puppetry artists put forth comments such as “you have to think about it and focus’ and “they [the artists] talk you through it, let it sit in your mind, what to do. If you forget it, they don’t get angry, they just say, ‘oh ok, this is what you do.”

49

ArtPlay Melbourne Symphony Orchestra Ensemble (music) Initiated by ArtPlay Creative Producer, Simon Spain and musician Gillian, who at the time was the Education Officer for the MSO, this program has now run for eight years (2004-2011) with a new group formed each year. The Ensemble program has involved three-to-four two-day workshops, spread three months apart in the school holidays, with new groups formed each year. Each two-day workshop involves the creation of a piece of music inspired by a piece from a current MSO concert program available to the children. Gillian chooses a piece she feels has elements that can form the basis of a collaborative composition by the children. The first day (10:00am-3:30pm) is usually based at the Iwaki Auditorium, home of the Melbourne Symphony Orchestra in the ABC Centre. Over the two days, there is a mixture of small and whole group work. With no more than six, the children are periodically clustered into sub-groups to work on components of the final work. Depending on the MSO musicians involved, the instruments played by the children and their expertise, these groups could consist of an orchestral grouping like strings, or an instrumental mix. Led by a MSO musician, each group works in a separate rehearsal space spread throughout the complex. Gillian moves from whole-group leader to roving between groups, actively supporting and facilitating. The following day the workshop moves to ArtPlay, with Gillian clearly positioned as the musical director. Most of the day is spent on further development of the parts that are progressively linked and layered with each other to form a multi-sectioned composition and rehearsing in readiness for a final performance in front of families and friends. The children return again in a few months to work on another improvised composition stimulated by another composer featured in the MSO program.

I try to take them through a process that is exactly what the musicians [professionals] would do. I give them the same task and questions [as the musicians]. They nut out how to make the piece work among themselves. The process itself is authentic, and it has applications across a really wide sphere. I hope that the skills that they learn, the way they approach that problem solving is creative and honest. It’s not about imposing the quickest and easiest solution, but really trying to kind of nut out what’s needed, what’s required or what’s wanted, and struggling with that, you know, they struggle and they see musicians struggling. That’s what I aim for in the projects. That’s what I think is the art of ensemble

50

Part 2.

Kids’ Own Publishing

Introduction

Childrens Community Publishing FAQs

125

WHATKids’ Own Publishing publishes books written and illustrated by children.

We provide a range of programs and products for children and families from diverse communities to improve literacy.

As the world’s first dedicated publisher of books by children, for children we know that the real value lies in what these books can do for young learners. When children, families and communities invest directly in the process it supports:

• Increased participation in literacy experiences

• A greater love of books that lies at the heart of successful literacy learning

• Improved parent-child reading experience

※ Each year Kids’ Own Publishing publishes over 20 books by children, each with their own unique ISBN, reaching an estimated 25,000 readers.

WHOKids’ Own Publishing founded first in Ireland in 1997 and established in Australia in 2004, has grown out of the 25 years experience of Victoria Ryle and Simon Spain running similar initiatives in Europe and Australia.

THE NUMBERS• Partnerships with over 60 organisations

• Published over 100 books by children.

• Over 5000 children and adults participate each year

• Published in over 10 languages including Aboriginal languages.

KEY INNOVATIONS• <The Kids’ Own Book Cubby>: A portable travelling library providing opportunities to showcase the work of young writers and

illustrators

• <Book Factory>: A tailor-made mobile workshop immersing children and young people in an innovative creative story production experience, supported by a professional author, illustrator and publisher

• <WePublish>: An innovative new app for the iPad using digital technology to enable children to produce their very own picture book (wepublishapp.com)

KEY PROJECTS• <Kids’ Own Schools Program>: A comprehensive literacy and publish program delivered in schools across Australia.

• < Donkeys Can’t Fly on Planes>: A book published and supported by Kids’ Own that tells 25 stories of survival by South Sudanese refugee children living in Australia

• <A Recipe for Community>: Bringing together children and adults with different abilities to work with artists in a community context to break down barriers and promote an inclusive society

OUR SUPPORTERS INCLUDEAustralia Council

ArtsVic

Department of Education and Early Childhood Development, DEECD

State Libraries of Victoria and WA

Local government including the Cities of Melbourne, Geelong andCardinia Shire

And many philanthropic foundations

KIDS’ OWN PUBLISHING

126

First, what do we mean by publishing?publishing means a story can be shared with many. Publishing is the opportunity to make beautiful copies of words and illustrations. Publishing is the magic that takes an idea, hands it out to the world and allows it to grow.

What is children’s community publishing?1. I t is publishing books by children, with children, for children and their significant

adults, collaboratively in communities.



Why get children involved in publishing?1. Children, particularly those experiencing disadvantage, need to see themselves, their culture and their languages reflected in

the books they encounter.



What is the philosophy of Kids’ Own Publishing (a. k. a. the Kids’ Own Way)?1. It is a democratic process of developing content for a book collaboratively with a group of children and their significant adults,

alongside an artist.

2. It is respectful of children and their adults, across all communities, in all contexts where children and families are present such as playgroups, kindergartens, schools, libraries and other agencies.

3. It celebrates the creative energy of a group in a given time and place(and budget!)―it is not about perfection.

How does a group get from idea to book?1. Start by identifying the cultural and creative capital that already exists in your community: children, families, artist, designers,

cultural organisations...



CHILDREN’S COMMUNITY PUBLISHING: FAQS

www.kidsownpublishing.com ©Kids’ Own Publishing (Australia)

Children’s Community Publishing: FAQs First, what do we mean by publishing?

Publishing means a story can be shared with many. Publishing is the opportunity to make beautiful copies of words and illustrations. Publishing is the magic that takes an idea, hands it out to the world and allows it to grow. What is children’s community publishing?

1. It is publishing books by children, with children, for children and their significant adults, collaboratively in communities



Why get children involved in publishing?

1. Children, particularly those experiencing disadvantage, need to see themselves, their culture and their languages reflected in the books they encounter.



What is the philosophy of Kids' Own Publishing (a.k.a. the Kids' Own Way)?

1. It is a democratic process of developing content for a book collaboratively with a group of children and their significant adults, alongside an artist.

2. It is respectful of children and their adults, across all communities, in all contexts where children and families are present such as playgroups, kindergartens, schools, libraries and other agencies

3. It celebrates the creative energy of a group in a given time and place (and budget!) – it is not about perfection.

How does a group get from idea to book?

1. Start by identifying the cultural and creative capital that already exists in your community: children, families, artists, designers, cultural organisations…



2014 아르떼 해외전문가 초청워크숍- 제33차 어린이를 위한 문화예술교육과 공간 (Arts and Culture Education and Spaces for Children)

발행인 : 주성혜

발행일 : 2014. 11발행처 : 한국문화예술교육진흥원

기 획 : 한국문화예술교육진흥원 교육진흥본부 국제교류팀

홈페이지 : www.arte.or.kr

문 의 : 02-6209-5982등 록 : KACES-1451-C003

<저작권표식 추가>

ⓒ 본 자료집은 제작자와 출처를 표시하면 자유이용을 허락합니다.

단, 영리적 이용과 2차적 저작물의 작성은 허용되지 않습니다.

33차 해외전문가 초청 워크숍 자료집

Documents