THE TEACHING OF DRAWING.

Waikato Times, Volume 94, Issue 14713, 30 July 1921, Page 9 (Supplement)

THE TEACHING OF DRAWING.

!N SOLE CHARGE SCHOOLS,. (By 8.W.H.) It is to be regretted that in tlie past a great many sole charge teachers have looked upon the subject of drawing as a “frill”—an ornamental fringe wherewith to garnish the more solid subjects of the syllabus. In fact, there are still to be found many schools of this type where drawing is regarded witli the have-to-lakc-it-onc-duy-a-vvuck eye. If they hut realised it, such teachers are giving Hie cold shoulder to one of their best friends, in tiiat drawing is the finest means of teaching by visualisation. How much more easily docs a child grasp the idea of a story which is profusely illustrated, and how infinitely docs lie prefer 1 it to one not thus embellished! So can the wise teacher use drawing ns a lever to the better understanding of almost every school lesson, and as a means of relaxation and real enjoyment. Nor should drawing be limited to being a class subject. No oral lesson should ho without its explanatory blackboard skclcties, for. a simple drawing, however crude, will often ccnvcy the meaning better than half-an-hour’s talking.

The subject of drawing now falls broadly into four classifications, each concerned with its appropriate trim or purpose(a) Object drawing, which is concerned with the faculty of observation, and the power to represent that whiich lias been observed; (h, mechanical drawing, which provides preliminary exercises for practical anil technical subjects, and may be directed especially towards the teaching cf arithmetic and mensuration; (c) exercises in memory drawing, whiich are supplementary to object drawing, being the representation after an interval of subjects which have been carefully observed; and (d) free expression drawing, which provides an exercise for the imagination, or in the power of Visualising concepts, and is ir. itself a form of recreation Object Drawing. Object drawing is particularly well done in some schools. Where it .s less successful, and in some instances it is very bad indeed, the cause may be looked for in over-direction. In I articular, the initial drawing of the object by Hie teacher from the teachers’ viewpoint leads to memory repetition of the 8.8. specimen. The teacher’s demonstration is (intended to guide tlie class, but more frequently discourages observation, because it is so much easier to remember than to look for one’s self) Thus one sometimes finds the entire school producing alleged copies of a simple object, which actually arc alike in form and. iclicf, but should vary in these particulars wiith each individual point of view. If demonstration of the use of a medium is desirable, it is best to demonstrate by the drawling of an object which docs not 100 closely resemble the object eventually set, but which embodies those points of form, shadow, etc., which the child is particularly meant to observe. Valuable 8.8. lessons could he taken in illustration of special difficulties such ns the joining of cup and jug-handles, joints and knots on branches, the varying ellipses in a bottle, etc., but these illustrations should not remain in view Whilst, the pupils arc at work on their own drawings. Conventional ideas. In object drawing there are a few conventional ideas to which children are prone, and which it is well to demollish by the oral discussion of comparative objects, such as “Snow is White,” “An Egg is White,” “The Blackboard 1$ Black," “An Apple is Green or Red,” “An Orange is Deep Yellow.” These generalisations which xesult from preconceived notions of what is inherent in a thing, may best be modlifled by comparison with fiat objects of thl same shape and colour, or the examination of glossy and dull surfaces in the flat, and in relief, during which exercise the children will be encouraged to est-autiish for tnemsclves, that, in drawing, the aim is to represent what a thing looks like, rather than what it is believed to be like. The sooner this aim is grasped by children the more successful is thoir object drawing likely to become. There is nothing educationally wrong in outline drawing from the object—provided the above-mentioned conditions are fulfilled —except that it requires only partial observation io execute. Object drawing is like legal evidence. What is required is “the truth, the whole truth, and nothing tut the truth.” And to limit an exercise in observation and representation to the delineation of form and proportion is to render the subject insipid and miss more than half its interest. Besides, is one really justified ir. assuming that form and due proportion are so much more important than colour, relief, and texture? Should wc wilfully compel pupils to represent solid objects as dead spaces enclosed by outlines Outline Drawing. Frequently one bears outline drawing described as the method by which one indicates the form of our object, whiich is to be made, or be explained. This diagrammatic use of line is perfectly justifiable, for it is Hie definite function of certain forms of drawing. But at the moment I am considering the essential purpose of observational drawing from the actual object. \nd there is not the slightest reason why the accuracy of representation should i ot he as correct in the small school as in Hie large, if the teacher lias used careful observation as the basis of his instruction. At Hie recent Waikato Winter Show, amongst a tine display of beautifully shaded object drawings (some of Hie nature drawings were wonderful some of Lnc finest emanated from a sole charge school. I propose to deal later with the oilier three branches of drawing.