Virtual Art Education: Is it Possible?

Instructional delivery methods used in education have undergone many changes over the past few years. The traditional approach of using blackboards, models, and transparencies has evolved to include more advanced technology, such as smart boards, computers, and the Internet. The emergence of the Internet and Web has opened the doors to the possibility of a new age of learning (Yeh & Lahman, 2007), In the last 10 years, the Internet has changed how educators and students find, manage, and use information, transforming social interactions and posing new challenges both in and out of the classroom (Colman, 2004; Mayo, 2007; Richardson, 2004; Sweeney, 2004). These changes have an impact not only on courses related to technology, but also on courses related to art. Mayo (2007) notes that art teachers and researchers, as well as artists, have an opportunity to utilize the new landscape of digital technology to develop the art researchers of tomorrow. This article provides an overview of web-based technology’s role in art education.

The Internet is a network of physical infrastructure and short-lived interactions. It includes text- and image-oriented web pages, communication-based exchanges of e-mail and instant messages, and diary-like blogs and RSS (Real Simple Syndication) feeds (Buffington, 2008; Erickson, 2005; Richardson, 2004; Sweeney, 2004). Buffington (2008) notes that the most recent incarnation of the Web is Web 2.0. Generally speaking, the technologies of the Web 2.0 movement have changed the power structure of the Internet, altering who can create content for the Web and making it particularly well-suited for art education by enabling the creation of content and social networking.

Web 2.0 has created new educational opportunities. Art education, in particular, has continually evolved in response to arttechnology integration. Gaimster (2008) and Mayo (2007) suggest that art educators have a unique opportunity to integrate studio practice with technology. Doing this could create an environment that supports a wide range of creative media and could be applied to most disciplines in art and design, from architecture to cultural studies, fashion to product design, and graphics to film making. In addition, Gaimster and Mayo have (separately) speculated that the integration of studio practice and technology could pave the way for teaching with technology, crossing boundaries between real-world materials and digital media.

Developments in Internet technology have redefined how students and teachers use the Internet, changing them from mere readers into writers, as well as making it easier for them to filter and track the evergrowing number of resources online. Liao (2008) and Richardson (2004) agree that social networking technologies and online virtual communities are popular among youth. They have also noted that, in fastgrowing numbers, educators across the country and throughout the world are discovering just how powerful this new, interactive Internet can be and are taking advantage of youth interest in it.

Colman (2004) and Gaimster (2008) argue that the Internet has also created a new type of academic environment. Virtual environments are places where students can engage in discussions that deconstruct a site’s appearance, content, navigation, usability, and work-based learning. They can use the Internet to work collaboratively, exchange pleasantries and arguments, engage in intellectual discourse, conduct commerce, exchange knowledge, support one another emotionally, make plans, brainstorm, solve problems, manage projects, reflect upon the strengths and weaknesses of their solutions, and engage with practitioners from the wider art and design community.

The Internet is a collaborative and decentralized network, and the development of Internet-based art, art education, and digital technologies represents an important step in art learning (Richardson, 2004; Sweeney 2004). As Mayo (2007) notes, artists and art educators might be on to something with the inherent constructivism of their practices. Mayo also suggests that, whether using pencils, brushes, or welding irons, artists can use new media to create imaginative solutions to open-ended problems.

Colman (2004), Liao (2008), and Sweeney (2004) also argue that new media art uses digital technologies and the Internet as media. However, they add that new media art is a hybrid production and requires interplay between art, technology, and humans. Furthermore, new media is not just a tool, but also a medium—a cultural interface connecting humans and containing their experiences. In addition, Colman, Liao, and Sweeney have each speculated that the combination of art and technologies often leaves little time in art educators’ curricula for engaging students in critical explorations of digital technology, though it does challenge the dominance of the traditional art-education curricular model.

Sweeney (2004) notes that the use of new media or web-based technologies in art education might lead to the emergence of a form of digital visual-culture pedagogy. Colman (2004) asserts that educators should use web-based technologies to create new forms of art-education curricula and instructional design. Colman claims that Internet art “makes strange” the web environment to which students are accustomed and notes that students will not know what to do with this strangeness without art educators’ guidance. Without guidance, students will most likely reject Internet art and create web pages resembling those with which they are familiar. Colman also urges art educators to encourage students to critically contemplate the Internet, especially if they have difficulty going beyond web authoring and have little experience with art criticism.

New forms of expression, such as digital painting, eco-art, net-art, robotics, and artificial intelligence, certainly may be helpful in pushing students to use unfamiliar art forms and to extend the limits of their aesthetics, as well as their understandings of the cultural functions of art and technology (Colman, 2004; Mayo, 2007). Colman (2004) has found that engaging students in a series of art-criticism activities could facilitate their transition from conceiving the Web as an information repository to conceiving of it as an expressive medium.

On the other hand, Richardson (2004) speculates that educators have been slow to adopt blogs for a variety of reasons, including access, privacy, and security. However, he suggests that as more people catch on to the blog phenomenon, more educators will start to experiment with blogs as a way of communicating with students and parents, archiving and publishing student work, learning with collaborators, and managing knowledge that school communities create.

What is more, throughout the year, teacher and students could continually add to their blogs sites (del.icio.us, weblogs, Face book, MySpace, etc.) that relate to what they are studying in class. Because everyone involved with a blog could access and alter it at any point, each blog could become a shared knowledge base of relevant websites. Thus, social networking accounts could become records of a class’s learning process (Buffington, 2008; Churchill, 2009; Doe, 2004; Erickson, 2001).

In addition to being accessible, web-based technologies are powerful tools that can be used to develop creative approaches to teaching (Erickson, 2005; Gaimster, 2008). Erickson (2005) and Gaimster (2008) have found that, compared to traditional instruction, websites offer access to much more information, as well as images that illustrate procedural steps. Erickson and Gaimster have also observed that online interactive reviews can provide immediate, individualized feedback to students on their understanding of the sequence of those steps. What is more, Lee and Tseng (2008) have advocated that other forms of digital-learning instruments be designed, such as e-learning, virtual reality, network services, computer animation, digital audiovisual, digital archives, mobile application, and content processing software.

While the advantages of the Internet are undeniable, Colman (2004) has showed that there are difficulties inherent in using the Internet to conduct critical pedagogy, particularly when students are completely unfamiliar with Internet art and take webdesign conventions for granted. Furthermore, Colman notes that instead of being able to draw on their knowledge of the web to create a context for Internet art, students sometimes find that their existing knowledge, at least in the beginning, is a barrier to exploration and acceptance. It may also make it difficult for them to reevaluate their perceptions of computers, the Internet, and the Web as tools for information gathering.

Recent studies have asserted that artists and educators should cultivate the creation of art-education curricula, pedagogical practices, and models that integrate arttechnology experimentation (Colman, 2004; Liao, 2008; Mayo, 2007; Sweeney, 2004). Colman (2004), Erikson (2001), and Mayo (2007) have suggested that art educators create new terms (e.g., Art Net) for their methodological or educational purposes. According to them, “Art on the Net” is a term that could be used to describe an image that is created in a nontechnology based medium, scanned to a computer, and displayed on the Web. For instance, if an oil painting was photographed and the photograph scanned to create a digitized image that was then uploaded to a webpage, this would be considered Art on the Net. Colman, Erikson, and Mayo have also (separately) claimed that the concept of Art on the Net treats the Internet as a virtual gallery where digitized artwork is “hung” and viewed by clicking on a hyperlink. In addition, Internet reproductions of artwork may appear on multiple websites. An enormous amount of art is reproduced on the Internet, due to the ease with which computers can replicate any medium.

Colman (2004) argues that as digital media is integrated into art curricula, art educators should encourage student to use computers and other digital technologies for personal and collective self-expression. He has also found that because the learning curve can be steep for sophisticated computer-graphics software and other digital technologies, many art educators may find it necessary to spend most of their instructional time acclimating students to software environments. However, Sweeney (2004) has stated that use of computers should not substitute for work with art materials in art classrooms. Sweeney has also suggested that beginning lessons with a preproduction phase provides opportunities for integrating painting, drawing, and writing into digital media-based projects.

Mayo (2007) asserts that art educators should not focus on teaching software and says that it is not essential for students to learn every feature of a software package, as software and its complexity can easily dominate lessons. What is more important, Mayo suggests, is that a lesson be project driven. Mayo is implying that students will easily lose interest in learning a software package when such learning is not connected to the creation or realization of a project. Understanding the goals of a project and software’s value in achieving those goals is most important.

Buffington (2008) and Mayo (2007) identify user-friendly tools as an advantage of web-based technologies. Such technologies have many interprograms that are similar and repeat functions, making it easy for new users to update web-based content frequently and easily. Colman (2004) has found that it is useful to draw attention to these features and has demonstrated how students can repurpose skills and understand software on their own. In addition, educators should know that Internet art could be confusing when users do not know where to go or what to look for. Erickson (2005) suggests that art educators refer to the Who Cares for Art (WCFA) program as a source of ideas when developing art-education curricula, as WCFA identifies inquiry as an explicit strategy in curriculum development. The program's introduction spells out the benefits of skilled questioning, and all of the tracked assignments it recommends challenge students to use concepts by articulating original questions that guide their own art making and investigation.

Buffington (2008) observes that students can use various web-based technologies to track their progress, store their digital portfolios, and engage in academic discussions. For example, students might make MySpace pages for artists after conducting research on their lives and works. They would need to consider such issues as how an artist would want to represent her/himself online, what artworks the artist would want to include images of, what types of music the artist might have enjoyed, and which books might have influenced the artist.

According to Gaimster (2008), certain areas of good practice in the teaching of art and design are easily transferable to virtual environments. Art educators aim to develop students who can engage in critical thinking and reflection. However, many secondary art teachers struggle to help students both appreciate others’ art and make meaningful artworks of their own (Erickson, 2001). What is more, in addition to keeping in mind the technical requirements needed to view artwork online, educators must reconsider their criteria for selecting works for art-criticism activities. They should consider a work’s approachability, strengths, and themes, as well as the relevance of those themes to students’ lives (Colman, 2004). They should also have confidence and experience using web-based technologies to participate in virtual communication, and they should not be afraid of using these technologies in their lessons (Gaimster, 2008; Richardson, 2004; Lee & Tseng, 2008).

Assessments are important in motivating students to engage in blogging (Churchill, 2009). Art educators may make use of such assessment tools as Tech Literacy Assessment, mCLASS: Reading, Inc., Acuity Diagnostic Assessment System, PLATO eduTest Assessment, and Pearson Benchmark (Doe, 2006). Besides these formal assessment tools, Blogs, MySpace, Friendster, and Facebook are examples of simple and efficient ways to keep portfolios and record learning progress (Buffington, 2008). A blog is a website that is updated frequently. It usually includes some degree of interactivity that allows readers to post comments, feedback, and report options. Educators have the tools to create protected environments where participants are known to one another and outsiders can be excluded (Buffington, 2008; Doe, 2006).

Internet programming offers opportunities not only to present information within a general conceptual structure, but also to develop systems of efficient, individualized feedback (Erickson, 2005). Furthermore, the commenting capabilities of many blogging software packages allow for easy peer review by students and teachers and make it easy to bring in experts or mentors from outside the classroom (Richardson, 2008). Through blogs, students, parents, and teachers can post comments about artwork or offer constructive feedback about artwork and ask questions (Buffington, 2008).

Besides allowing for comments and feedback, blogs can display pictures and video, including audio and flash, and even store files for PowerPoint presentations or Excel spreadsheets (Richardson, 2004). In addition, students can make their own blogs for free, post digital images of their work, and write about their work as it progresses. Thus, their thoughts during the artistic process may be easily recorded and made available for future access. Blogs are yet another way to maintain electronic and digital portfolios and file images (Buffington, 2008; Richardson, 2004).

Recent studies have found that students can successfully and easily create final projects using digital-content instruments (Colman, 2004; Lee & Tseng, 2008). Because such tools are easy to use, content on the Web can be updated quickly and simply. For instance, a person can easily update his or her MySpace or Flickr [supTV] page with new text, images, or videos on a daily basis (Buffington, 2008). Some students attribute their increasing receptiveness to Internet art to their acquisition of webauthoring skills like comprehension, transferring, reading, and writing (Erickson, 2005; Lee & Tseng, 2008). Students have also explained that they are able to look at a work of Internet art and feel like they understand how the artist put it together, making the work less intimidating (Colman, 2004).

The foregoing reinforces the notion that web-based technologies are positive tools for students and educators. Computerbased curricula and web-based assessments can make it easier for teachers to meet the needs of diverse student populations (Doe, 2006). What is more, Internet art promotes critical thinking (Coleman, 2004). A caveat, however, is that some students are unwilling to continue blogging when not required to do so by a course or a facilitator (Churchill, 2009).

Some days, it seems like everything is becoming web-based. As connection speeds improve, the Internet's flexibility; accessibility; potential to reduce paper use; potential to be used for data collection, analysis, and reporting; and potential to reduce costs make it very attractive (Doe, 2004).

In an era that demands educational accountability, many art teachers feel an increasing need for credible evidence of the long-term effectiveness of art instruction (Erickson, 2005; Lee & Tseng, 2008). Moreover, Shavelson, Phillips, Towne, and Feuer (2003) have suggested that designbased research “seeks to trace the evolution of learning in complex, messy classrooms and schools, test and build theories of teaching and learning, and produce instructional tools that service the challenges of everyday practice” (p. 25). In addition, the researchers have advised that instructors focus on one unit at a time, include technology in their curricula, and evaluate performance.

The integration of technology into art education will open new opportunities to students and art educators, enhancing their abilities and knowledge. Challenges to how we interact with artwork are opening new pathways for talking about work and learning. If technological networks continue to be viewed from new angles and connected with previous approaches to teaching and familiar forms of vision, new forms of digital visual-culture pedagogy may emerge (Sweeney, 2004). In addition, students will continue to challenge art, making and creating forms of expression never before envisioned (Mayo, 2007). Colman (2004) has found that students who unequivocally perceive Internet art as “art” feel this way because such art “contains pictures without an explanation” (page number needed), along with an open-endedness that makes them think.

In fact, many are seeing web-based technology as a cheaper alternative to course management systems. It is now relatively inexpensive and simple for anyone with Internet access to create and disseminate students’ ideas online. The emergence of technologies associated with Web 2.0 has made it significantly easier to create content for the Web and has changed the types of content available on the Web. Many applications are freely available to anyone with the Internet (Buffington, 2008; Liao, 2008; Richardson, 2004). In addition, web-based technology is accessible; for instance, Del.icio.us, blogs, RSS, etc. are tools that allow one to subscribe to information and access the latest posts or news from one place. These technologies make information extremely accessible by providing access to sites at any time and from anywhere (Buffington, 2008; Churchill, 2009; Doe, 2004; Erickson, 2001).

Buffington (2008) and Mayo (2007) agree that it is certainly not realistic to expect teachers to reinvent entire curricula just to include web-based technologies. However, as we become accustomed to using web-based tools in our lives, it may become natural to use them in our teaching. This would create an environment to which art educators must respond. Our field has reached an exciting point, where a wide range of tools are available to help us address the world in which our students live and to connect what we do in school to what our students do outside of school.

Gaimster (2008) suggests a need for more empirical research on how educators and students interact in virtual worlds and how their interactions influence the educational process. This article will increase our understanding of virtual interactions, help us gain a deeper understanding of the mediated learning process, and apply our understanding to art and design.