Page 503

the children who get sensitive art education
come largely from upper-middle class
professional families who recognize its
value and seek it out. Yet, these are the
children whose visual and cognitive
experiences are already quite rich. This is
clearly one reason why art education can
be seen as a luxury. On the contrary,
children for whom art education is
essential, are those who live in under or
inappropriately stimulating families who
neither understand nor seek out such help.
This is the challenge for art education, how
to develop ways of reaching out to and
involving these neediest groups.
Occasionally one finds reports of promising
but isolated programs which are innovative
but struggling to survive. Some involve
just children, and some have found that
it is both possible and exceptionally
gratifying to involve parents as well',
McFee has described the general directives
in a recent and excellent overview of art
programs for disadvantaged groups'.
Those who wish a fuller description of
the characteristics and life style of the
disadvantaged children will find the following
books by Deutsch', Pavenstedt', Riessman'
and Schorr" valuable.
Summary
I have attempted to describe with some
documentation an urgent and important role
for art education that transcends the
conventional view of art as a luxury.
This role sees art education as an essential
but largely unrecognized need specifically
for disadvantaged pre-school children.
The goal of such education is to stimulate
the development of a capacity to use visual
symbols in thought and action, a need that
is on a par with that for learning to use
language and other widely accepted social
skills. The challenge this presents for art
education is enormous, but is probably no
greater than that facing many of our current
institutionalized systems. It is clear that
the challenge and changes indicated will not
be met by art educators alone, as they
require mutual and cooperative efforts
among many professions. As our national
policy shifts toward meeting our urban
needs, and funds become more available, I
would urge art educators to undertake the
program and research changes that are
here implied.
REFERENCES
1. Behrendt, D. F.: In Milwaukee, Artists
Come in Small Sizes. Southern
Education Report, May, 1967.
2. Bolman, W.M.: The Art and Psychology
of Preschool Children, Art Education,
19:9-12, 1966.
3. Bolman, W. M.: An Outline of
Preventive Psychiatric Programs for
Children. Archives of General
Psychiatry, 17:5-8, 1967.
4. Bolman, W. M. and Westman, J. C.:
Prevention of Mental Disorder: An
Overview of Current Programs.
American Journal of Psychiatry,
123:1059-1068, 1967.
5. Deutsch, M. P.: The Disadvantaged
Child and the Learning Process.
In Passow, A. H. (Ed.): Education in
Depressed Areas, New York, Teachers
College, Columbia University, 1963,
pp. 163-179.
6. Deutsch, M. P. and Associates: The
Disadvantaged Child: Studies in the
Social Environment and the Learning
Process. New York, Basic Books, 1968.
7. Eisner, E. W.: American Education and
the Future of Art Education. Chapter
13. In Hastie, W. R. (Ed.): Art
Education. The 64th Yearbook of the
National Society for the Study of
Education, Part II. Chicago, University
of Chicago Press, 1965.
8. McFee, J. K.: Art for the Economically
and Socially Deprived. Chapter In
Hastie, W. R. (Ed.): Art Education.
The 64th Yearbook of the National
Society for the Study of Education,
Part II. Chicago, University of
Chicago Press, 1965.
9. Pavenstedt, E. (Ed.): The Drifters:
Children of Disorganized Lower-Class
Families. Boston, Little-Brown, 1967.
10. Report: Mama Goes to Nursery School.
American Education, 3:10-11, 1967.
11. Riessman, F.: The Culturally Deprived
Child. New York, Harper and Row, 1962.
12. Schorr, A.: Poor Kids - A Report on
Children in Poverty. New York, Basic
Books, 1966.
13. Smith, P. J.: Head Start to What?
School Arts, 66 (No. 10) 9-10, 1967.
i
503 1
l