No abstract

Richard Lachapelle is Associate Professor on the Faculty of Fine Arts at Concordia University, Montreal, Quebec. His recent publications include several chapters in art education books as well as articles in the Canadian Review of Art Education and Studies in Art Education. Deborah Murray (M.A., Educational Technology) and Sandy Neim (M.A., Art Education) are both recent graduates of Concordia University's School of Graduate Studies.Thinking calls for images, and images contain thought. Therefore, the visual arts are a homeground of visual thinking. 1 A common misconception about the nature of art and of aesthetic appreciation is that these activities are essentially a question of "feeling," as if tuning in to the right feeling will automatically lead to a full understanding of the work of art. Another widespread misunderstanding essentially reduces art viewing to a simple question of perception, as if looking long and hard is always enough to apprehend the work of art's message. Fortunately, a growing body of research into adults' art viewing experiences is debunking these widely held beliefs as oversimplifications of the art viewing process. We can now assert, with a good degree of certainty, that our art viewing experiences solicit four key areas: the affective, perceptual, communicative, and cognitive dimensions of human experiencing. 2 Therefore, we would be hard-pressed not to agree with Rudolph Arnheim's reflections, presented above, on the important role of thought in shaping our artistic and aesthetic experiences.While acknowledging at the outset the essential roles of affect, perception, and communication in our art viewing experiences, this paper focuses more specifically on aspects of the intellectual dimension of this experience. First, we will present and discuss a model that we have developed over the last several years. This model identifies the kinds of knowledge and learning involved in art viewing activities. Second, we will present the results of an empirical study conducted to provide support for the model. Finally we will briefly discuss the model's usefulness for the purposes of aesthetic education. Aesthetic Understanding as Informed Experience 79 The Model of Aesthetic Understanding as Informed ExperienceThe Model of Aesthetic Understanding as Informed Experience provides an explanation of the process of understanding and appreciating a work of art from an educational perspective: it identifies the types of knowledge involved and it also pinpoints the kinds of learning at each stage in the process leading to an understanding of the aesthetic object.In this model, the process of viewing and understanding a work of art is visualized as a two-phased type of informed experience. Through a process of experiential learning, the viewer first encounters the work of art and formulates an initial interpretation. Then, through a process involving theoretical learning, the viewer compares his or her first interpretation with a related body of external, scientific information. This second step in the ...

This study investigates the widely accepted notion that spending more time looking at works of art results in better art appreciations. To this end, we examined the verbal responses of 34 non-expert viewers to works of public contemporary art. We structured and conducted the study in such a way as to compare, for each informant, examples of free, self-guided viewing experiences against instances of semi-structured viewing experiences with researcher imposed minimum durations. In this way, we hoped to determine the impact of longer viewing periods on the informants' art appreciation performance by examining changes in cognitive dispositions and in production of interpretive hypotheses about the works of art. According to these two indicators, extended viewing periods were found to have a significant and positive effect on the art appreciation performances of the majority of the non-expert participants in this study. These findings support the notion that there is a relationship between viewing duration and better art appreciations.

IThis paper is based on the doctoral dissertation Aesthetic Understanding as Informed Experience: Ten Informant-Made Videographic Accounts about the Process of Aesthetic Learning (1994),

Résumé Tout changement de structure requiert des changements de relation. Ainsi, le développement d’une pratique communautaire au sein des organisations de services sociaux et sanitaires ne peut se résumer au déploiement d’équipes milieu, à une réallocation des ressources ou à la révision de la structure de gestion. Les organisations sont appelées à transformer leurs rapports aux personnes aidées, aux proches et à la communauté ainsi qu’à revoir leurs rapports à l’interne. Sans changement profond de ces rapports, la pratique communautaire qui a généralement cours dans les établissements du réseau des services publics peut engendrer des effets pervers et paradoxaux : reproduction des pratiques traditionnelles d’intervention, épuisement des intervenants, isolement des équipes sur leur territoire et fragilisation de leur sentiment d’appartenance et de loyauté à l’organisation. L’une des façons de contrer ces effets consiste certainement à instaurer de nouvelles formes de soutien qui accroissent et soutiennent la cohérence entre les modalités de gestion et les exigences de la pratique. À un moment marqué par la raréfaction des ressources et l’amplification de la pression reliée à la diversité et à la complexité des situations d’intervention, il peut être tentant pour les organisations de multiplier les demandes et les objectifs d’intervention. Dans ce contexte, il devient primordial de préserver des espaces de parole et de participation aux prises de décision. Il convient également de favoriser davantage le partage d’expertise et la réflexion collective sur les valeurs qui sous-tendent les actions entreprises.