Art lessons can range from a copying type lesson where the students create very much the same end product as the teacher, to completely open ended exploration. Different teachers do things differently in their classrooms: some feel strongly that students should be uninhibited and allowed to create at will, while others see a practical need for creating a drawing step-by-step with all of their students.

I float somewhere in the middle. Copying master paintings is a learning tool used by art students for decades and learning a specific technique with other students, I believe, has it's place too. But I also see a lot of growth when students are allowed to expand and explore on their own with me acting as more of a facilitator than instructor. I especially wanted my high school classes to be more student-led, but I always struggled to find the balance between instructing and facilitating. Too much instructing stifles exploration. Too little instruction leaves the students frustrated. Then I stumbled across this post about writing TAB lesson plans (Teaching for Artistic Behavior).

The answer is so simple: split up class time between the two! Genius! It has been working wonderfully! We have done some fun demonstrations, like this repeating pattern:

A theme for the student-led pieces is chosen. This term the theme is "compassion". The students did some mind mapping and thumbnail sketching to get the ideas flowing. Now they are piecing together what their artwork will be.

They each come up with a lot of ideas. Some get thrown out, some get tabled, a few get used. Some of the techniques I demonstrated in class are used, but most are not. Some techniques (like airbrushing, how cool is that?) are thought up by the students. Whatever the means, the kids work hard on their art and can be proud of their final products. Their efforts result in a piece that is technically proficient and meaningful to them and others.

This type of teaching can be used in many fields. Where on the spectrum do you lie?