Talk:Arts integration

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search


Needs Work[edit]

I agree this article needs work. With the current focus on an American context, it would make sense that there was mention of discipline-based arts education/comprehensive arts education and even the terms "learning/teaching through the arts" used interchangeably with arts integration. I'm glad to see that there is a recognition that arts integration is a term used by education communities to refer to an approach used in classrooms but to also recognize that "integrated arts" is a term used by some artists/arts communities to describe an arts practice that utilizes/incorporates concepts/skills from other disciplines beyond the arts. Further because arts education can occur in formal and informal settings/in and outside of institutions, arts education and community art can be related/share intention/share practices. Perhaps a link should be made to the Wikipedia article on community art if an arts education article is created. Naskhan1 (talk) 03:16, 14 September 2011 (UTC) Sept 13, 2011

Why separate article?[edit]

hang on a minute, why do we have an article just about arts integration here under the heading of 'arts education'? Arts integration is a particular US-based variant of arts education but there are many other traditions and approaches that ought to be represented in an article. This is in need of some serious work. See for example this paper from the UNESCO world summit on arts education.

Clarification on a Deleted External Link[edit]

An external link I added to this article was deleted for -- I believe -- conflict of interest (COI) issues. I would like to re-add it and explain why I think there is no conflict of interest.

The link I added (http://artsed.issuelab.org/research) is for a website which houses a collection of research on Arts Education. The website belongs to a nonprofit organization called IssueLab whose purpose is to collect and archive research produced by nonprofits and university-based research centers. The link does not go to IssueLab's home page or any sort of promotional or donations page. It goes directly to the collection on Arts Education -- an actual list of research documents. The research was not written or sponsored by IssueLab and we do not benefit financially from an increase in the number of people who view the research. We are a non-profit-seeking organization by definition. Like Wikipedia, IssueLab is a neutral resource; we do not espouse any political views and we include in our archive research produced by a large variety of organizations. The link was added in the spirit of expanding knowledge, what Wikipedia is all about. One of IssueLab's guiding principles is to encourage sharing of and free access to information. Along with the link I included the description "Nonprofit Research Collection on Arts Education" so as to make it clear what the link led to. I assure you I was not trying to mislead anyone or promote any sort of commercial website. I was simply trying to offer an additional resource for those who might be interested. I apologize if I appeared to be breaking the rules, but after carefully reading Wikipedia's guidelines on External Links and Conflicts of Interest, I truly believe that I am not.

From Wikipedia's section on External Links: "Some acceptable links include those that contain further research that is accurate and on-topic, information that could not be added to the article for reasons such as copyright or amount of detail, or other meaningful, relevant content that is not suitable for inclusion in an article for reasons unrelated to its accuracy."

IssueLab's Arts Ed collection contains "further research that is accurate and on-topic" and "could not be added to the article for reasons such as...amount of detail."

External Links also includes guidelines on "Links Normally to be Avoided": "Links mainly to promote a website. Links to web pages that primarily exist to sell products or services, or to web pages with objectionable amounts of advertising. Links to sites that require payment or registration to view the relevant content."

The link was added to promote the research, not to promote the website or to sell anything. The site does not require payment or registration.

From the section on Conflicts of Interest: "A Wikipedia conflict of interest (COI) is an incompatibility between the aim of Wikipedia, which is to produce a neutral, reliably sourced encyclopedia, and the aims of an individual editor.

"COI editing involves contributing to Wikipedia in order to promote your own interests or those of other individuals, companies, or groups. Where advancing outside interests is more important to an editor than advancing the aims of Wikipedia, that editor stands in a conflict of interest."

The aim of IssueLab is to offer another "neutral, reliably sourced" resource. "[A]dvancing outside interests" is not more important to us than "advancing the aims of Wikipedia," which are strongly in line with those of IssueLab.

I hope I've explained the situation clearly and I hope you won't object to my re-inserting the external link. My apologies for the length of this entry.

IssuesRUs (talk) 16:19, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Arts integration. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

As of February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete the "External links modified" sections if they want, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{sourcecheck}} (last update: 15 July 2018).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.


Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:22, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Arts integration. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

As of February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete the "External links modified" sections if they want, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{sourcecheck}} (last update: 15 July 2018).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.


Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:03, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Arts integration. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

As of February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete the "External links modified" sections if they want, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{sourcecheck}} (last update: 15 July 2018).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.


Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:17, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

Overlap and Potential Improvements[edit]

There seems to be quite a bit of overlap between this article and Art education in the United States, and it is confusing which sections should belong under which title. For example, this article is heavily focused on the United States and covers more about public arts funding in the US than the other.

For this article, there could be an additional section to expand on the debate around best practices for arts integration (i.e., how to incorporate art in the classroom and interweave it with other curricula - is it through external community groups that are slotted into the school day, by providing teachers with arts training, etc.?). I think the existing section on the Contribution of Arts Education to Children's Development can also be fleshed out with more perspectives (i.e., why it is important to promote art in education and the various theories around its benefits, or arguments that it is inessential).

Rjxue (talk) 20:26, 12 October 2017 (UTC)