Bulb Archived: A/R Partners 2016-2017: Jirik & Murray

Please respond to the prompts below with your partner. You can upload images, videos and weblinks to enhance your responses to the prompts.

1. How did you and your teaching partner decide to do this project? (Please describe the context of your project, this can include influence from previous projects, context of your school, community, etc.):

 The project idea came together from a joint effort by the teaching partners. Sensory experiences was to be taught through the curriculum, and the artist had worked with the same students on projects that included multi-disciplinary tasks.

2. Big Idea:

How do we understand our environment through our senses?

3. Inquiry:

How can we understand understand and use our senses to better understand who we are, and how we communicate with tour environment?

4. Grade Level:

9-12 (low-incident)

5. Academic Subject(s):

Science

6. Artistic Discipline(s):

Multi-disciplinary

7. How many years have you worked together as partners?:

This is our first.

8. Please describe your project:

Our project consists of singling out each of the 5 senses, and creating projects for students with disabilities in communicating to better understand what how they use them to understand their environment.

image-
in preperation for “Touch”

9. What were you hoping the students would learn during this project?:

We were hoping that the students would get a chance to focus on their sensory experience, and acknowledge how they process experience through their senses individually.

image-

10. What surprised you during this project?:

How some far some students were able to develop their projects and skills.

image-

11. What worked in this project and why?:

Testing the students range of understanding their sensory experiences by  hosting projects that were dedicated to help them understand how they experience through them. 

image-

12. What didn’t work and why?:

Developing projects that successfully address the theme while addressing artistic development. It didn’t work because of the range of media that needed to be covered vs. the artist’s capabilities. It was also difficult to clearly assess student’s engagement and understanding in the theme as a whole, even though it was beneficial to focus on projects on an individual basis.

13. What was your approach to assessment for this project?:

Assessment was determined from the outcome of the student projects, dialogue and a reflection worksheet.

14. How did you share your student’s learning process with others? Who did you share it with?:

Through artifacts and documentation.

15. Did sharing your students’ learning occur according to your plan for social engagement in your proposal? Why or why not? Please explain.

Yes and no. The plan was set out to test the range of students capacity, experiment and assess at the classroom level. For the sharing event, we will be staging more of a multi-sensory display that would include projects that would resemble similar ideas to the kinds we had used in the classroom.

16. How are you as teachers, artists and students social engagers through this work?:

We are social engagers throughout this work as teachers and artists in that we are trying to distill and connect to the students directly in the classroom. The students have become social engagers with each other as a community and with an audience through their projects.

17. Did sharing your project with others influence how you will approach future projects?:

When we combined the classrooms, the approach had to be streamlined and focused to organizee activities more step-by-step. The idea of having a sharing event in its completion has influenced how we develop projects that illustrate the process of what we were doing, as opposed to art objects.

18. Standards Addressed: (Common Core, Next Generation Science, National Core Arts):

N/A    tied to IEP goals