pg. 194 I have said, throughout this work, that I have written it for two audiences. In this short final chapter, I intend to extrapolate from the text the points which I feel are pertinent for Researchers and for Early Years Practitioners to consider.
Researchers
The most important thing which has come out of this work for future researchers, is that we need to be very careful not to make assumptions about children’s drawings. We need to ensure that we have the whole picture, so to speak, which requires that we closely observe the process of the drawing as well as the product – the drawing itself. If we only have the product – the drawing – we may make assumptions which are inaccurate. We may think the child is saying something, when in fact they are not. A teacher recently told me an anecdote which demonstrates this: she was in her class of 5 year old children, having a visit from the local authority advisor. The advisor sidled up to her and said ‘I think you ought to be very concerned about that little boy at the painting table.’ The teacher looked over and saw the advisor was referring to a child who was of no concern whatsoever. ‘Why is that?’ she asked. ‘Well, he has the choice of all those lovely colours, and he is only using black,’ said the advisor. ‘That’s very significant.’ The teacher walked over and saw that this was the case. She bent down by the child in question, and looked at his black painting. She said to him ‘Can you tell me about your painting? It’s interesting that you have only used one colour…’ The little boy said ’Yes, it’s the only colour I could reach from here.’
Although this story may make us smile, or wince, the message is clear. Before we come to any conclusion about any drawing, we need to be sure we have the whole story about how, when, where, why it was drawn. In any group of children, the motivations for drawing, even a given subject, will be different. Taking one of my stories as an example, the story of Tiny Ted, for instance, one child may be interested in the content of the story (see Fig 7:8 where Jonathan has drawn many elements of the story including the lights flashing on Angelina’s dress), whereas another may be inspired by Tiny Ted flying, and may draw that (see Fig 4:6).
Chapter Six, where I examined the drawings of a small group of adults, showed that making a generalisation about adults being more proficient at drawing than children is not true. In addition, this chapter clearly shows that experiments using drawing to
pg. 195 prove something – such as the apparently simple task of asking a child to draw the level of water in a beaker, as Piaget and Inhelder did (1956), success at which will show understanding of the concepts of vertical and horizontal, are not as simple as they may seem, since the adults, largely, either could not do it, or said they found it a difficult task.
In Chapter Eleven I examined the notion of accuracy – and I questioned what this means in a drawing.
For instance young children do not, as a general rule, draw with life-like perspective, and very often their proportions are not according to life. Luquet (1927/2001) called this ‘intellectual realism - i.e. if given a cup to draw with the handle facing away from them, they will draw the handle even though they cannot see it. Cox (1992:93) reports asking her daughter (aged 4:11) to draw a cup with ‘hidden’ handle. Her daughter drew the cup without the handle, then, on consideration, added a handle “because it makes it look better”. Children sometimes also ‘fold out’ elements of their subject, which gives the drawing several viewpoints at once (see Fig 11:6 for an example of this). And they are not adverse to making things see through – or X-ray, as it is usually called. Fig 12:1 is an example of a mine by a child aged 9 (Lowenfeld 1978:181), which I think is really innovative. If you want to portray what happens in a mine, then this is good way to do it. We can see things happening on the surface, and we can see people doing different tasks underground, with a conveyor belt joining the two environments.
pg. 196 The drawing in Fig 12:2 is a ‘cross-section of a lead mine,’ and it serves the same purpose. We can see the activity, the multi-layering of being underground, the different jobs and the smallness of the tunnels.
Fig 12:2 Cross Section of down a lead mine
The difference between the two renditions, is that Fig 12:2 has ‘cut-away’ sections of earth, to enable us to see the activity in the tunnels, and this also gives us a sense of the relationship between the different areas within the mine. But to all intents and purposes, the two images show the same thing – they have just been given different names – and in real terms, both are impossible. But reality, accuracy, has nothing to do with an impressionistic drawing – no matter who the drawer is. (See Fig 11:7)
Drawing is an easily accessible and increasingly popular means of getting data direct from a subject, especially a subject who is preliterate. The message for
pg. 197 Researchers is that the data must be treated with extreme caution – a child’s drawing is not always what it seems.
Early Years Practitioners
In Chapter Three, where I examined storytelling from the literature, the implication for practice is the effect that a live storytelling can have on a child - it can increase a child’s vocabulary, concentration and ability to think symbolically and metaphorically. It can increase listening skills, and imagination, and can create an understanding of language with its rhythms. It enhances memory too.
The new EYFS40 (Early Education 2012:29) states that the unique child of 30-50 months should be
Beginning to be aware of the way stories are structured. Should Suggest how the story might end.
Should Listen to stories with increasing attention and recall.
Joins in with repeated refrains and anticipates key events and phrases in rhymes and stories
All of which can be achieved through a storytelling session.
Chapter Four issues a caveat for EY Practitioners – not all drawings are the same, and it is important that the circumstances of how, when, where and why a drawing is produced are closely observed before any conclusions about the drawing should be made. A ‘scribble’ might be just that, or it might be an internal dialogue or journey. It could also be an exploration of movement – a dance on paper. Scribbling over an image might mean that the child is unhappy with what they have drawn (see Fig 7:4 where Isaac has scribbled over his drawing of Five Eyes), but, equally, it might be that the child is going through an enveloping schema, or, indeed, that the scribble is a narrative (this is the fire engine, and this is where he went putting out fires). Close observation by practitioners is needed for interpretation.
Chapter Four also raises awareness of the influences on a child, which may effect how they draw. Drawing from life is not the same as copying, and copying, in itself, is not necessarily a bad thing – it helps us to understand how another person has made an effect. Copying requires thought, dissection and understanding, which is different to learning how to do something by rote (see Fig 4:14)
40
pg. 198 Chapter Five discussed the literature about children’s drawings. Arnheim (1967:166) reminds us that children are not always trying to represent something when they draw, sometimes they are simply trying to make sense of their world. Dissanayake (2012:180) says that ‘although with adult prompting children may label their drawings family members, flowers, suns or animals, the images at first all look remarkably alike.’ Does Luquet’s ‘fortuitous realism’ exist, or is it the process which is more important, as Matthews (1994) suggests, and it is adults who ‘see’
representation?
Early Education Developmental Matters (2012:30) reminds us that early mark making ‘is a sensory and physical experience for babies and toddlers, which they do not yet connect to forming symbols which can communicate meaning’.
The small piece of research in Chapter Six, where adults were asked to draw, shows that the assumption that adults, simply because they are ‘grown-ups' CAN draw is not true, and we, EY Practitioners must ensure we do not make a false comparison. The beautiful and competent illustrations in picture books are made by professionals, and have no relation to how most people draw.
It is unwise, by the same token, to make developmental judgements about a child, simply through a drawing they do – if the child can draw, their drawing will appear more competent than one by someone who cannot draw – see Fig 6:6 – who drew which horse?
The Chapters about the stories we told, have thrown up several implications for practice.
First, in Chapter Seven, the difficulty in ‘changing hats’ is mentioned – Jo, the teacher, is telling the story, but is unable to stop being the teacher. This is
understandable, and difficult. If we are to accept the ideas of the children, to really make them think and get their imaginations going, then it is very important that we accept their ideas. Like drawing, this is not always easy, and takes practice. If practitioners become aware of how often, in their dealings with the children, they find themselves ‘testing’ them (what colour is that?), asking questions to which they already know the answer, then the size of the difficulty can be assessed.
Practitioners will need to make a conscious effort, and also to help each other, to spot ‘testing’ behaviour, and to change it for a mode which is more open, and allows the children to experiment and explore – and make mistakes.
pg. 199 Also in Chapter Seven, the story of Five Eyes threw up a worrying example of
inequality. Isaac was really affected by the story, whose main character was, he decided, a black person. Staff noticed his unusual motivation, and his drawing after the story was different to others. I had not intended to make Billy, the hero, black, because it had not occurred to me that it would be of any significance to the black children in the predominantly white class (and school – and city). But it did have. The message for practitioners is to beware racism – in oneself and in the children. Early Education (2012:38) says an enabling environment will ‘help children to learn positive attitudes and challenge negative attitudes and stereotypes, e.g. using puppets, Persona Dolls, stories and books showing black heroes or disabled kings or queens or families with same sex parents, having a visit from a male midwife or female fire fighter’. It is important we do this, but, more importantly, we need to ensure that our own frames of reference have no bias and are non-discriminatory. Children are racially aware (Winkler 2009) at a very young age, and any racial intolerance should be identified, talked about and stopped. I was horrified, just the other day, to find my 4 year old granddaughter talking about a colour as being ‘skin- colour’. This insidious, and damaging, racism needs to be identified, and addressed.
Chapter Seven also concerns Harika, who is a child with EAL. The story about the man who went fishing really gave her the opportunity to show off her knowledge and understanding about a school visit to the local submarium through her drawing. (Fig 7:10) in a way which is unlikely, for her, through speech.
The last implication for practice in Chapter Seven is telling the truth in storytelling. Zipes (1995:225) says it is difficult to really know what impact a story has on a child, and it is imperative, therefore, that a story has truth. Our stories had ‘truth’ because they came from the children, were a reflection of their lives and experience, and, mostly, imagination. When taboo subjects came up they were dealt with rather than skirted round. A storytelling session is an opportunity to address difficult subjects, and allow the children to think about them and find solutions – not easy for staff, but very beneficial. Chapter Eight also deals with this.
Chapter Nine concerns Jenny, the invisible child, and practitioners need to heed what we discovered. Firstly, that the idea of Invisible Children is not new, but very often, in a busy setting, they remain invisible – being average, keeping their heads down,
pg. 200 Really Here In Name Only (Oakley ?1999) – what Morgan & Dunn (1988) call a
marginal survivor. The story/drawing process gives an opportunity for staff to closely observe a child, not for assessment, but just to really see that child. Once his or her invisibility is recognised, then strategies can be put in place to help the child take off the cloak, and become a part of the group.
Practitioners may read Chapter Ten and say – ‘yes, this is what frightens me about this process – having to make up a decent story.’ But I hope that several things will be clear :
1. that we are not talking about great literature – the story just has to make sense, and if it is easier to start with a story that you and the children know, then that is fine
2. learn to say yes – the children will make the story work
3. allow more noise than usual. Allow the children to shout out. You will not be able to hear or use every idea, but it is important that they get spoken, nonetheless
4. get into danger, deal with taboo suggestions – see how the children deal with them too! If someone makes a ‘taboo’ suggestion, help the class to work through it
5. Practise asking questions in a way which ensures the children do not feel they are being tested.
6. TIME – don’t let procedures and timetables stop flow – do not do a story session at home time, do it either at the beginning of the day or in the middle – so the children can draw for as long as they want
Chapter Eleven looks at the nub of the thesis – it reminds us that if we want mastery, we need to practise; it reminds us that children do not live in isolation – they are aware of their surroundings, their culture, and they use their experiences in the work and play as they try and work things out; it posits the thought that expecting
children to draw in any particular way is not viable – they will draw according to what it is they want to express. They do not always draw with perspective (but neither do I see Fig 11:3), and, like medieval artists, they sometimes find inventive ways of showing something (Fig 12:1). Chapter Eleven reminds us that accuracy is a