College Teaching / Studies in Methods of Teaching in the College

In this chapter an attempt is made to set forth the aims, content, and methods of art instruction in the college. In this discussion the word "college" will be regarded in the usual sense of the College of Liberal Arts, and art instruction as one of the courses which lead to the degree of bachelor of arts.

There is no term that is used more freely and with less precision than the word "art." In some usages it is given a very broad and comprehensive meaning, in others a very narrow and exclusive one. The term is sometimes applied to a human activity, at other times to the products of but a small part of that activity—for example, paintings and statuary.

In this chapter the term will be used in accordance with the definition evolved by Tolstoi, who says: "Art is a human activity, consisting in this, that one man consciously, by means of external signs, hands on to others feelings he has lived through, and that other people are affected by these feelings, and also experience them."[102] The external signs by which the feelings are handed on are movements, as in dancing and pantomime; lines, masses, colors, as in architecture, painting and sculpture; sounds, as in music; or forms expressed in words, as in poetry and other forms of literature. The external signs with which art instruction in the college deals are lines, masses, and colors. This discussion, therefore, treats of instruction in the formative or visual arts, which include architecture, painting, sculpture, decoration, and the various crafts, in so far as they come within the meaning of the definition given above.

Concerning the nature of art and the purpose of art instruction in the college, there is so much misunderstanding that it will be well to make an attempt at clarification. Art is too commonly regarded as a luxury—a superfluity that may serve to occupy the leisure of the well-to-do—a kind of embroidery upon the edge of life that may be affixed or discarded at will. Whereas, art is a factor that is fundamental in human life and development, a factor that has entered into the being of the race from the dawn of reason. Its products, which antedate written history by thousands of years, form the most reliable source of information we possess of the habits and thoughts of prehistoric man. It has been the medium of expression of many of the choicest products of human thought throughout the ages. These products have been embodied in forms other than that of writing. Its functions are limited neither to the citizen, the community, nor the country; they extend beyond national bounds to the world at large. Art belongs to the brotherhood of man. It is no respecter of nationalities. It is obvious that in a general college course, a study of the religious, social, and political factors in civilization that does not include art among these factors is incomplete.

The question under discussion concerns the teaching of art to the candidate for the bachelor of arts degree, and this question will be solely kept in view. Since, however, graduates in science, engineering, law, medicine, etc., are not exempt from the needs of artistic culture, they too should have at least an effective minimum of art instruction.

Art is recognized as a social activity. It enters largely into such practical and utilitarian problems of the community as town planning and other forms of civic improvement. As workers in such activities, college graduates are frequently called to serve on boards of directors and committees which have such work in charge. To most of such persons, education in art comes as a post-collegiate activity. Surely the interests of the community would be promoted if the men and women into whose hands these interests are committed had had some formal instruction in art during their college years.

If by practical education we mean training which prepares the individual for living, then the study of an activity that so pervades human life should be included in the curriculum of even a so-called practical college course. Art education has a more important function than to promote the love of the beautiful, to purify and elevate public taste, to awaken intellectual and spiritual desires, to create a permanent means of investing leisure. Important as all these purposes are, they are merely a part of a larger one—that of revealing to the student the relationship of art to living.

Art expression has the quality of utmost flexibility. This flexibility appears also in art instruction, and it is for this reason that in no two institutions of higher learning is the problem of art instruction attacked in the same way. There is, consequently, a great diversity in the types of art courses, even in the college.

The flexibility of art instruction is both advantageous and embarrassing. It is an advantage in that it can be adapted to almost any requirement. It can be applied to the occupations of the kindergarten, or it can be made an intensive study suitable for the graduate school. But this very breadth is also a source of weakness in that it tends to divert the attention from that precision of purpose which all formal instruction should have, however elementary or advanced. It is apt to be too scattering in its aims. It is not easy to determine exact values either in the subject studied or in the accomplishment of the student. Estimates in art are, and should be, largely a matter of personal taste and opinion. They are not infrequently colored by prejudice, especially where the judgment of producing artists is invoked. This, again, is as it should be. An artist who assumes toward all works of art a catholic attitude, weakens that intensity of view and of purpose which animates his enthusiasm. It can easily be understood that to a larger extent than in other subjects the nature and scope of art instruction depends upon the personality of the instructor.

The flexibility to which we have adverted adapts art instruction to diverse educational aims.

In that it can be made to conduce to accurate observation of artistic manifestations, and to logical deduction therefrom, it may be given a disciplinary purpose. In its highest development, to which only the specially gifted can attain, the ability to observe accurately and to deduce logically demands the most exacting training of the eye, of the visual memory, and of the judgment. As an example of the exercise of this sort of discipline we may cite Professor Waldstein's recognition of a marble fragment in the form of a head in the Louvre as belonging to a metope of the Parthenon. When, after Professor Waldstein's suggestion of the probable connection, a plaster cast of the head was taken to the British Museum and placed upon the headless figure of one of the metopes, the surfaces of fracture were found to correspond.[103] The most useful application of this ability lies in the correct attribution of works of art to their proper schools and authorship. Signor Morelli in his method of identification used a system that is almost mechanical, yet the evidence supplied by concurrence or discrepancy of form in the delineation of anatomical details was supplemented by a highly cultivated sense for style, for craftsmanship, and for color as well as by an extensive historical knowledge.

In that art instruction cultivates taste and the appreciation of works of art, it has a cultural purpose. By many persons it is assumed that this is its sole value.

In that it serves to illuminate the study of the progress of civilization, it has an informative purpose.

In that it enables the technical student to correlate his work with that of past and present workers, it aids in the preparation for professional studies.

Art has been defined as "the harmonic expression of the emotions."[104] Accepting this definition as a modified condensation of Tolstoi's definition, it is clear that in a work of art two separate personalities are involved—that which makes the expression, and the other to whom the expression is addressed; thus, there are artists on the one hand, and the public on the other. Since we shall have to speak of two distinct classes of students,—namely, those who are in training as future artists (as architects, painters, sculptors, designers, etc.), and those who are taking courses in the understanding or appreciation of art,—it will be convenient in this discussion to refer to the former as art students and to the latter as lay students.

Formal art instruction has been offered by colleges to both these groups. It is evident that for the training of the art student emphasis must be placed upon the technique of creative work, whereas for the lay student emphasis must be placed upon the study of the theory and the history of art. It would seem, however, that these two methods are not mutually exclusive; nor should they be, for the art student would surely gain by a study of the principles of art and its history, while the lay student would profit by a certain amount of practice directed by an observance of the principles.

Mr. Duncan Phillips, in an article entitled "What Instruction in Art Should the College A.B. Course Offer to the Future Writer on Art?" proposes a hypothetical course in which "the ultimate intention would be to awaken the æsthetic sensibilities of the youthful mind, to encourage the emergence of the artists and art critics, and the establishment of a residue of well-instructed appreciators."[105]

This proposal assumes the desirability of the completion of a general course designed for college students, before beginning the special courses designed for those individuals whose aptitudes seem to fit them for successful careers as artists on the one hand, or as successful writers on art, or art instructors on the other.

In this place the question of professional training will not be discussed. The courses under consideration are designed to serve the group of lay students from which specialists may, from time to time, emerge. It is of the utmost importance that provision for the further training of such specialists should be made in the college, in the postgraduate school, or in an allied professional school of art.

In view of the great diversity in the treatment of the subject in different colleges, it will be impossible to present a series of courses that might, under other conditions, be representative of a general practice throughout the country. On the other hand, the attempt to make an epitome of the various methods in use at the more important colleges would result in the presentation of a succession of unrelated statements drawn from catalogues which would be hardly less exasperating to the reader than it would be for him to follow, successively, the outlines as presented in the catalogues themselves. Various summaries of these outlines have been made, and to these the reader is referred.[106]

An attempt is here made to set forth a programme which is offered as a suggestion, upon which actual courses may be based, with such modifications as are demanded by local conditions, the number and personal training of the teaching staff, and the physical equipment available.

The task before the college art instructor is to cultivate the lay student's understanding and appreciation of the works of art and to develop an ardent enthusiasm for his subject, tempered by good taste. This understanding will be based upon a workable body of principles which the student can use in making his artistic estimates and choices. Such a body of principles will constitute his theory of art.

Art instruction for lay students may be presented in two ways:

1. By the study of theory supplemented by the experimental application of theory to practice, as by drawing, design, etc.

2. By the study of theory supplemented by an application of theory to the analysis and estimation of works of art as they are presented in a systematic study of the history of art.

Consider now the relation of practice and history to theory:

First as to practice: Art instructors are divided into three camps on the question of giving to the lay student instruction in practice: (1) Those who believe that not only is practice unnecessary in the study of theory, but actually harmful; (2) those who believe that practice will aid in a study of the theory of art; (3) Those who believe that practice is indispensable and who would, therefore, require that all students supplement their study of the theory of art by practice. As may be surmised, by far the largest number of advocates is found in the middle division.

One form of practice is Representation. In this form the student begins by drawing in freehand very simple objects either in outline or mass, and proceeds through more advanced exercises in drawing from still life, to drawing and painting of landscape and the human figure. With the addition of supplementary studies, such as anatomy, perspective, modeling, composition, craft work, theory, history, etc., this would be, broadly speaking, the method followed in schools of art, where courses, occupying from two to four or five years, are given, intended primarily for those who expect to make some sort of creative art their vocation.

It is this kind of work which opponents to practice for the lay student have in mind. They claim that only by long and severe training can he produce such works as will give satisfaction to him or to others who examine his handiwork. They contend that the understanding of works of art is not dependent upon ability to produce a poor example. They offer many amusing analogies as arguments against practice courses for lay students. They maintain that the proof of the pudding is in the eating, rather than in the making; that to enjoy music one need not practice five-finger exercises; that other creatures than domestic fowls are capable of judging of the quality of eggs; that to appreciate the beauty of a tapestry it is not necessary to examine the reverse side. It will perhaps be sufficient, for the present, to point out that in so far as such alleged analogies can be submitted for arguments, they are equally applicable to laboratory courses in any subject which is studied with a non-professional or non-vocational purpose.

It is true, however, that such a course as that outlined above demands a large amount of time, compared with the results attained; and while successful courses in Representation are offered in certain colleges, the great mass of college students, who cannot hope to acquire a high degree of skill, would hesitate to devote a large part of their training to technical work, even if college faculties were willing to grant considerable proportions of credit for it toward the bachelor of arts degree.

It will be understood by the reader that the value of elementary freehand drawing as a means of discipline or as an aid to the technical student is not under discussion. The value of drawing as a fundamental language for such purposes is universally admitted. The questions are these: Can some form of practice in art be used to aid in the understanding of the principles of art? Is representative drawing the only form of practice available for the lay student who undertakes the study of art? Fortunately, the advocates of practice can offer an alternative; namely Design. Mr. Arthur Dow distinguishes between the Drawing method (Representation) and the Design method by calling the former Analytical and the latter Synthetical. In an article on "Archaism in Art Teaching"[107] he says: "I wish to show that the traditional 'drawing method' of teaching art is too weak to meet the new art criticism and new demands, or to connect with vocational and industrial education in an effective way; but that the 'Design method' is broad and strong enough to do all of these things."

"The drawing method," he continues, "is analytic, dealing with the small, the details, the application of art; the design method is synthetic, dealing with wholes, unities, principles of art."

Mr. Dow carries his exposition into the application of the Design method to vocational work, but it can be used with equal effect in supplementing the lay student's study of art.

But the questions immediately arise: Is not a preparation as long and arduous required to make a designer as to make a painter or a sculptor? And is not the half-baked designer in as sorry a plight as the half-baked artist of any kind? The answer to both is simple: The lay student is not in any degree a painter or a sculptor or a designer, neither is he in training for any of these professions. The advantage of the Design method is, that with no skill whatsoever in drawing, the beginner in the study of art can apply to his own efforts the same principles of design which have from time immemorial entered into the creation of great works of art. The college freshman planning a surface design with the aid of "squared" paper is applying the same principles that guided the hand of Michelangelo as it swept across the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel.

Such principles as symmetry, balance, rhythm, emphasis, harmony in form, mass, value, and color can be inculcated by solving the simplest as well as the most complicated problems. A graded series of exercises can be undertaken by the student that will, with a comparatively small amount of manual skill carry him a considerable distance in the understanding of the principles of design upon which all creative art rests. Another advantage is that, in the process, considerable skill in freehand drawing also can be acquired. But this advantage is merely incidental.

The greatest value lies in the fact that the Design method offers to the student an excellent means of self-expression. The student, through no fault of his, is too prone to absorb and too little inclined to yield of the fruits of his knowledge. Herein lies a partial remedy for the tendency of college students to make receptacles of their minds into which knowledge is poured through the ear by listening to lectures, or through the eye by reading. Herein is a means of overcoming mental inertia, for, certainly, the solution of a problem in design calls for thought—the amount of mental exertion being commensurate with the difficulty of the problem. In this, the Design method is superior to the Representation method, though it would be an error to assume that freehand drawing is chiefly a manual operation. Such an error is entertained by those only who never have learned to draw. Another considerable value lies in the fact that even if the lay student of design should in later life never set hand to paper,—as he probably will not, any more than he who has taken courses in drawing and painting will ever attempt to paint a picture,—yet he has come into practical contact with the leading principles of art, and has gained a knowledge that can be applied not merely to the discriminating understanding of the artistic qualities of the exhibits in art museums or in private galleries, but to the art of every day. It can be applied to the estimating of the artistic value of a poster, a book cover, or a title page; to the choosing of wall paper; to the arranging of the furniture in a room; to the laying out of a garden; to intelligent coöperation in the designing of a house or in replanning, on paper at least, the street system of a city; or to the selecting of a design for a public memorial. It is not to be assumed that in thus exercising a cultivated taste he would always make conscious application of the principles of design in making his estimates. These would have so entered into his habit of thought that he would unconsciously make what Mr. Dow calls "fine choices."

The educational value of the Design method is almost universally recognized in the art departments of our public schools and in our art schools, and it is probable that when its aims and methods are better understood by our college faculties, its disciplinary, cultural, and informative value will be more widely recognized in the college of liberal arts, and that it will take equal rank with theme and report writing as a means of cultivating a taste for literature, with the practice of harmony and counterpoint as a means of appreciating music, and with laboratory work in acquiring knowledge of a science.

Next, consider art history as a means of inculcating the principles of art. It is evident that the emotions or feelings of the artist and the methods he employs to express them may be studied in such masterpieces as the Hermes of Praxiteles and the Lincoln of St. Gaudens. In either he may observe the application of the principles of balance, mass, repose, harmony, and the analysis of character. In either he may study the technique which involves the material of the statues, the tools employed, and the manner of working.

There is, however, great advantage in considering such examples in their place in the evolution of art, and their significance in their relation to the social and political development of the human race—in other words, in studying systematically the history and development of art.

Instruction in history of art is not without its pitfalls. It is too apt to lapse into a mere listing of names and dates of artists and their work, with the introduction of interesting biographical details and some discussion limited to the subjects treated in selected examples. It is often too much concerned with who, when, and where and not sufficiently with why and how. A person may possess a large fund of the facts of art history and yet have but little understanding or appreciation of the aims and underlying principles of art production. It should never be forgotten that for the college student the history of art is merely a convenient scheme or system upon which to base discussions of the principles of art as involved in the works themselves, an outline for the study of the artistic affiliations of any artist with the great company of his antecedents, his contemporaries, and his successors. The instructor should never regard practice or history as ends in themselves, but as means to the development of the understanding.

In some colleges only the more advanced students are permitted to take art courses. It does not seem wise thus to limit the years in which courses may be taken. An elementary course should be offered in the freshman year, while other courses of increasing difficulty should be offered in each of the succeeding years. The greatest variety is seen in the colleges throughout the country in the amount of art taught, and the amount of credit given toward the A.B. degree. When the subject is elected as a "minor," it should be one-tenth to one-eighth of all the work undertaken by a candidate for the bachelor's degree; while a "major" elective usually should cover from one-fifth to one-fourth of all the work of a candidate for the same degree. Some zealous advocates maintain that a certain amount of art training should be required for graduation. Valuable as art training would be to every graduate, it does not seem wise to make art a required subject in the curriculum. To compel men and women to study art against their will would destroy much of the charm of the subject both for the teacher and the student. Unless the subject is pursued with enthusiasm by both, it loses its value.

The courses suggested are as follows:

Course I (Freshman year). Introduction to the study of art. A study of the various forms of artistic expression, together with the principles which govern those forms. The study would be carried on (1) by means of lectures, (2) by discussions led by the instructor and carried on by members of the class, (3) by laboratory or studio practice in the application of the principles of art expression to graded problems in design, (4) by collateral reading, (5) by the occasional writing of themes and reports, (6) by excursions to art collections (public and private), artists' studios, and craft shops.

Some of the topics for lectures and discussion would be: Primitive art and the factors which control its rise and development; principles of harmony; design in the various arts; an outline study of historic ornament; composition in architecture, painting, and sculpture; concept in art, with a study of examples drawn from the master works of all ages; processes in the artistic crafts; application of the principles of design to room decoration.

The studio or laboratory work would include: Application of the principles of design; spacing of lines and spots; borders and all-over designs achieved by repetition of various units; studies in symmetry and balance; color study, including hue, value, intensity; exercises in color harmony; problems in form and proportions, decoration of given geometrical areas; applications to practical uses; studies in form and color from still life; use of charcoal, brush, pastel, water color; simple exercises in pictorial composition; problems in simplification necessitated by technique; application of principles of design to room decoration. (This course would be prerequisite for all subsequent courses in practice.)

Course II (Sophomore year). A general course in the history of art. A consideration of the development of the arts of architecture, sculpture, and painting from prehistoric periods to recent times. In this course emphasis would be laid upon the periods of higher attainments in artistic expression, and the discussions would be directed toward the qualities of great masterpieces rather than toward those of the multitude of lesser works.

The work would be carried on (1) by means of lectures; (2) by discussions led by the instructor and carried on by members of the class; (3) by collateral reading; (4) by study of original works of art, photographs, and other forms of reproduction; (5) by the writing of themes and reports; (6) by visits to art galleries and artists' studios. (This course would be prerequisite for subsequent courses in history, etc.)

Following these two general courses there should be two groups of courses: Group A, Practice courses; Group B, History courses. Candidates for the A.B. degree who expect to take postgraduate work in creative art or in the teaching of creative art would elect chiefly from Group A. Lay students who are candidates for the A.B. degree and who expect to make writing or criticism in art, or teaching of art to lay students, or art museum work their vocation, would elect chiefly from Group B; as would, also, those composing the greater number, who study art as one means of acquiring general culture.

In the following lists of courses the grade of each course is indicated by a roman numeral placed after the title of the course, the indications being as follows:

Beyond these indications no attempt is here made to prescribe the subdivisions of the courses, nor the number of hours per week, nor the number of weeks per year in each course.

GROUP A: PRACTICE COURSES

A1 Freehand Drawing. (I) Drawing in charcoal and pencil from simple objects, plaster casts, still life, etc. Elements of perspective with elementary problems.

A2 Freehand Drawing (continued). (II) Drawing in charcoal, pencil, pen and ink, brush (monochrome in water color) from plaster casts, still life and the costumed figure. Out-of-door sketching.

A3 Color (Water Color or Oil Color). (II) Drawing in color from still life and the costumed figure. Out-of-door sketching.

A4 Modeling. (III) Modeling in clay from casts of antique sculpture and of architectural ornament as an aid to the study of form and proportion.

A5 Advanced Design. (III) Theory and practice. (Continuation of Course I. Introduction to the study of art.)

A6, A7, ... etc. Advanced Courses in Drawing, Painting, Modeling, and Applied Design (IV) selected from the following: Studies in various media from life. Composition. Illustration. Portrait work. Practical work in pottery, bookbinding, enameling, metal work, interior decoration, wood carving, engraving, etching. These courses would be supplemented by lectures on the theory and principles of art. Topics of such lectures would be: Theory of Design, Composition, Technique of the Various Arts, Artistic Anatomy, Perspective, Shades and Shadows, etc.

GROUP B: HISTORY COURSES

B1 History of Ancient Art. (II)

B2 History of Roman and Medieval Art. (II)

B3 History of Renaissance Art in Italy. (III)

B4 History of Modern Art. (III) History of art in Western Europe during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries.

B5, B6, ... etc. History of Special Periods; Consideration of Special Forms of Art, and of Great Masters in Art (IV) selected from the following: Art of Primitive Greece, Greek Sculpture, Greek Vases, Early Christian and Byzantine Architecture, History of Mosaic; Medieval Illumination; Sienese Painters of the Thirteenth and Fourteenth Centuries; Florentine Painting; Domestic Architecture of Various Countries; Leonardo da Vinci and His Works; Art of the Netherlands; History of Mural Painting; History and Principles of Engraving; Prints and Their Makers; Chinese and Japanese Art; Colonial Architecture in America; Painting and Sculpture in America, etc., etc.

No attempt will here be made to comment upon the general furnishing and equipment of lecture rooms, laboratories, and studios. Nevertheless, some reference to the special teaching equipment is necessary for the further consideration of the methods of teaching.

Illustrations are of the greatest importance in the study of art. The best illustrations are original works of art. For manifest reasons these are not usually available in the classroom, and the teacher is dependent upon facsimiles and other reproductions. These take the form of copies, replicas, casts, models, photographs, stereopticon slides, prints in black and white and in color, including the ubiquitous picture postal card.

The collections of public art museums and of private galleries are of great value for illustrative purposes; but of still greater value to the student is the departmental museum, with which, unfortunately, but few colleges are equipped. Some colleges have been saddled by well-meaning donors with collections of various kinds of works of art which are but ill related to the instruction given in the department of art. The collections of the college museum need not be large but they should be selected especially with their instructional purpose in view. The problems of expense debars most colleges from establishing museums of art; but with a modest annual appropriation a working collection can be gradually gathered together. A collection which is the result of gradual growth and of careful consideration will usually be of greater instructional value than one which is acquired at one time.

An institution which owns a few original works of painting, sculpture, and the crafts of representative masters is indeed fortunate, but even institutions whose expenditures for this purpose are slight may possess at least a few original lithographs, engravings, etchings, etc., in its collection of prints.

Fortunately, there are means whereby some of the unobtainable originals of the great public museums and private collections of the world may be represented in the college museums by adequate reproductions. The methods of casting in plaster of Paris, in bronze and other materials; of producing squeezes in papier maché; and of reproducing by the galvano-plastic process, are used for making facsimiles of statues, vases, terra cottas, carved ivories, inscriptions and other forms of incised work, gems, coins, etc., at a cost which, when compared with that of originals, is trivial.[108] Paintings, drawings, engravings, etc., are often admirably reproduced by various photographic and printing processes in color or black and white.

Generally speaking, the most valuable adjunct of the college art museum or of the college art library is the collection of photographs properly classified and filed for ready reference by the instructor or student.

A specially designed museum building would present opportunities for service that would extend beyond the walls of the art department, but if such a building is not available, a single well-lighted room furnished with suitable cabinets and wall cases, and with ample wall space for the display of paintings, prints, charts, etc., would be of great service.

A departmental library of carefully chosen books on the theory, history, and the practice of the various arts, together with current and bound numbers of the best art periodicals of America and of foreign countries, is indispensable.

Methods will naturally depend somewhat upon the size of the class. In large classes—of, say, more than forty—the lecture method, supplemented by section meetings and conferences, would usually be followed. In the following discussion it is assumed that the classes will not exceed forty.

Under the head of Methods of Teaching are here included: Work in Class and Work outside of Class.

The work in class consists of lectures; discussions by the members of the class; laboratory or studio work; excursions. There is no worse method than that of exclusive lecturing by the instructor. If the methods employed do not induce the student to do his own thinking, they have but little value. Much of the instructor's time will be occupied in devising methods by which the students themselves will contribute to their own and their fellows' advancement.

Discussions led by the instructor and carried on by the members of the class should be frequent. From time to time a separate division of a general topic should be assigned to each member of the class, who will prepare himself to present his part of the topic before the class either by reading a paper or otherwise. Discussions by the members of the class, concluded by the instructor, should generally follow this presentation. Topics for investigation, study, and discussion should be so selected as to require the students to make application of their study to their daily life and environment. In this way their critical interest in the design of public and private buildings, of monuments, and of the innumerable art productions which they see about them would be stimulated.

For the purpose of illustrating lectures and aiding in discussions, prints and photographs may be shown either directly or through the medium of the reflectoscope. Or, they may be transferred to lantern slides and shown by means of the stereopticon. To a limited extent the Lumière color process has been used in preparing slides.

The methods of laboratory and studio work have already been briefly treated under the head of Courses of Instruction, and hardly need to be further amplified here.

It has already been stated that original works of art are the best illustrations, and that these are but rarely available within the walls of the college. Instructors in institutions which are situated within or near to large centers of population can usually supply this deficiency by arranging visits to museums and other places where works of art are preserved and exhibited; and to artists' studios and to workshops where works of art are produced. Instructors in institutions which are not so situated may supply the deficiency, in some measure, by arranging for temporary exhibitions in the museum or other rooms of the department. Rotary exhibitions of paintings, prints, craftwork, sculpture, designs, examples of students' work, etc., may be arranged whereby groups of institutions within convenient distances from each other may share the benefits offered by such exhibitions, as well as the expense of assemblage, transportation, and insurance. In arranging for such temporary exhibitions it is essential that only works of the highest quality, of their kind, should be selected.

Selections can best be made personally by the instructor or by capable and trustworthy agents who are thoroughly informed as to the purpose of the exhibition and as to the needs of the institutions forming the circuits. Such rotary exhibitions possess a wider usefulness than that of serving as illustrative material for the college department of art: they serve also as an artistic stimulus to the members of the college at large, and to the community in which the college is situated.[109]

The work of students outside of class has already been mentioned. It consists of collateral reading, the study of prints and photographs, and the preparation of written themes and reports. Notwithstanding the lavish production of books relating to art, there are but very few that are suitable for use as college textbooks. The instructor will usually assign collateral reading from various authors.

In attempting to measure the success or failure of the work, the teacher must ask himself, What do our college graduates who have taken art courses possess that is lacking in those who have not taken such courses?

The immediate test of the results of the work is in the attitude of mind of the students. Do they think differently about works of art from what they did before entering the courses? Is there a change in their habit of thought? Have they done no more than accept the lessons they have been taught, or have they so absorbed them and made them their own that they are capable of self-expression in making their estimates of works of art? These questions may be answered by the result of the written examination and by the oral quiz.

It must be confessed that the chief purpose of art instruction in the college is to supply a lack in our national and private life. Citizens of the older communities of Europe pass their lives among the accumulated art treasures of past ages. The mere daily contact with such forms of beauty engenders a taste for them. Partly through our Puritan origin, partly through our preoccupation with the development of the material resources of our country, we, as a people, have failed to cultivate some of the imponderable things of the spirit. So far as we have had to do with its creation, our environment in town and village is generally lacking in artistic charm.

The study by lay students of the art of the past has one chief object; namely, to train them to understand the works of the masters in order that they may discriminate between what is beautiful and what is meretricious in the art of the present day; to learn the lessons of art from the monoliths of Egypt, the tawny marbles of ancient Greece, the balanced thrusts of the Gothic cathedral, the gracious and reverent harmonies of the primitives, the delicate handicrafts of the Orient, the splendors of the Renaissance, the vibrant colors of the latest phase of impressionism, and to apply these lessons in the search for hidden elements of beauty in nature and art in their own country and in their own lives and surroundings.

Believing, as he does, in the value of artistic culture, it becomes the duty of the college art instructor to teach with enthusiasm unmarred by prejudice; to cultivate in the minds of his students a catholic receptivity to all that is sincere in artistic expression; to open up avenues of thought in the minds of those whose lives would otherwise be barren of artistic sympathy; to cull the best from the experience of the past, and, by its help, to impart to his hearers some of his own enthusiasm; for their lives cannot fail to touch at some point the borderlands of the magic realm of art.

Holmes Smith
Washington University

Bibliography

Ankeney. J. S., Lake, E. J., and Woodward, W. Final Report of the Committee on the Condition of Art Work in Colleges and Universities. Western Drawing and Manual Training Association. Oak Park, Illinois. 1910.

Ankeney, J. S. The Place and Scope of Art Education in the University. Western Drawing and Manual Training Association, 16th Annual Report. St. Louis, 1909.

Beaux, Celia. What Instruction in Art Should the College A. B. Course Offer to the Future Artists? The American Magazine of Art. Washington. D. C., October, 1916.

Blayney, T. L. The History of Art in the College Curriculum. Proceedings of the American Federation of Arts. Washington, D. C., 1910.

Brooks, Alfred. The Study of Art in Universities. Education. Boston, February, 1901.

Churchill, A. V. Art in the College Course. The Smith Alumnæ Quarterly. New York, February, 1915.

Clopath, H. The Scope and Organization of Art Instruction in the A. B. Course. Western Drawing and Manual Training Association, 17th Annual Report. Oak Park, Illinois, 1910.

Cross, H. R. The College Degree in Fine Arts. Western Drawing and Manual Training Association, 17th Annual Report. Oak Park, Illinois, 1910.

Dow, A. W. Anarchism in Art Teaching. Western Drawing and Manual Training Association, 19th Annual Report. Cincinnati, 1912.

Dow, A. W. Theory and Practice of Teaching Art. Teachers College, Columbia University. 2d edition. New York, 1912.

Dow, A. W. Modernism in Art. The American Magazine of Art. New York, January, 1917.

Frederick, F. F. The Study of Fine Art in American Colleges and Universities: Its Relation to the Study in Public Schools. Addresses and Proceedings of the National Education Association. Detroit, 1901.

Heller, O. Art as a Liberal Study. Western Drawing and Manual Training Association, 17th Annual Report. Oak Park. Illinois, 1910.

Jastrow, J. The place of the Study of Art in a College Course. Western Drawing and Manual Training Association. Oak Park, Illinois, 1910.

Kelley, C. F. Art in American Universities. Nation, 91: 74. New York, July 28, 1910.

Kelley, C. F. Art Education. Report of the Commissioner of Education. (Department of Interior, Bureau of Education). Washington, D. C., 1915.

Leonard, William J. The Place of Art in the American College. Education, 32; 597-607. Boston, June, 1912.

Low, W. H. The Proposed Department of Art in Columbia University. Scribner's Magazine. New York, December, 1902.

Mann, F. M. Coöperation among Art Workers in Universities. Western Drawing and Manual Training Association, 16th Annual Report. St. Louis, 1909.

Marshall, H. R. The Relation of the University to the Teaching of Art. Architectural Record. New York, April, 1903.

Monroe, Paul (editor). Art in Education, etc. Cyclopedia of Education. The Macmillan Company, New York, 1911.

Norton, C. E. The Educational Value of the History of Art. Educational Review, New York, April, 1895.

Phillips, Duncan. What Instruction in Art Should the College A.B. Course Offer to the Future Writer on Art? The American Magazine of Art. New York, March, 1917.

Pickard, J. Message of Art for the Collegian. The American Magazine of Art. Washington, D. C., February, 1916.

Robinson, D. M. Reproductions of Classical Art. Art and Archaeology. Washington, D. C., April, 1917.

Sargent, W. Instruction in Art in the United States. Biennial Survey of Education in the United States 1916-18 (Department of the Interior, Bureau of Education). Washington, D. C.

Seelye, L. C. The Place of Art in the Smith College Curriculum. Educational Review. New York, January, 1904.

Smith, E. B. The History of Art in the Colleges and Universities of the United States. Princeton University Press. Princeton, 1912.

Smith, Holmes. Art as an Integral Part of University Work. Western Drawing and Manual Training Association, 16th Annual Report. St. Louis, 1909.

Smith, Holmes. The Future of the University Round Table. Western Drawing and Manual Training Association. Oak Park, Illinois, 1910.

Smith, Holmes, Lake, E. J., and Marquand, A. The College Art Association of America. Report of Committee Appointed to Investigate the Condition of Art Instruction in the Colleges and Universities of the United States. School and Society. Garrison, New York, August 26, 1916.

Stanley, H. M. Our Education and the Progress of Art. Education. Boston, October, 1890.

Swift, F. H. What Art Does for Life. Western Drawing and Manual Training Association, 18th Annual Report. Springfield, Illinois, 1911.

Sylvester, F. O. Esthetic and Practical Values in Art Courses. Western Drawing and Manual Training Association, 16th Annual Report. St. Louis, 1909.

Waldstein, C. The Study of Art in Universities. Harper & Brothers. New York, 1896.

Walker, C. H. Art in Education. Western Drawing and Manual Training Association, 16th Annual Report. St. Louis, 1909.

Woodward, W. Art Education in the Colleges. Art Education in the Public Schools of the United States. American Art Annual. New York, 1908.

Wuerpel, E. H. The Relation of the Art School to the University. Western Drawing and Manual Training Association, 16th Annual Report. St. Louis, 1909.

Zantzinger, C. C. Report of Committee on Education. Proceedings of the 47th Annual Convention of the American Institute of Architects. Washington, D. C., December, 1913.

Note. For numerous discussions of problems of college art teaching, the Bulletins of the College Art Association of America may be consulted.

Footnotes:

[102] Tolstoi, L. N., What Is Art? Thomas Y. Crowell Company, 1899. Chapter V, page 43.

[103] Waldstein: Essays on the Art of Pheidias, Cambridge University Press. 1885, pages 95 et seq.

[104] New Princeton Review, II, 29.

[105] The American Magazine of Art, Vol. 8, No. 5, page 177.

[106] Woodward, W. "Art Education in the Colleges," Art Education in the Public Schools of the United States, edited by J. P. Haney; American Art Annual, New York, 1908.

Ankeney, J. S., Woodward, W., Lake, E. J., "Final Report of the Committee on the Condition of Art Instruction in Colleges and Universities." Seventeenth Annual Report of the Western Drawing and Manual Training Association. Minneapolis, 1910.

Kelley, C. F., "Art Education." Report of the Commissioner of Education, Vol. I, Chap. XV. Washington, D. C., 1915.

Smith, E. B., The Study of the History of Art in the Colleges and Universities of the United States. University Press, Princeton, 1912.

[107] Nineteenth Annual Report, Western Drawing and Manual Training Association, Cincinnati, 1912, page 19.

[108] Robinson, D. M., "Reproductions of Classical Art," Art and Archaeology, Vol. V, No. 4, pages 221-234.

[109] Rotary art exhibitions for educational purposes are arranged by the American Federation of Arts, 1741, New York Avenue, Washington, D. C.

PART SIX

XXV