“My Drawing sucks!’ Children’s belief in themselves as artists

It is commonly held that children show a decline in spontaneous art at the age of about seven and that the messages children receive impact on art confidence. Despite this prevailing view little research has been undertaken with children to explore the relationship between art confidence and messages. Therefore research was undertaken with 136 four to nineyear-old children to investigate drawing self-efficacy and the messages children give and receive. The findings show that there were significant differences in drawing self-efficacy levels when both year level and gender were considered, and statistically significant findings for preference for art, vicarious experience, emotional responses, effort and persistence and levels of difficulty. Themes that were generated by interviews and observations include those of participation, teachers’ roles, experiences of boys and girls, nature of verbal interactions and topics of drawings, comments about scribbling, good and bad drawing, art based discussion, concepts of effort and ability and links between literacy and drawing. This paper concludes with recommendations for educational practice including encouraging full participation, theme and inquiry-based programmes, art-based language and discussion, children teaching children, teacher professional development, and understanding drawing self-efficacy. “My Drawing sucks!’” Children’s belief in themselves as artists INTRODUCTION The year four children are drawing observational drawings of toys. Andrew critically looks at his drawing and says loudly to one in particular, “My drawing sucks!” He takes his drawing to his friend Eric. Eric looks at the drawing and laughs. Andrew then says again, “It sucks” and rubs out his drawing. Eric watches him and also rubs out his drawing. This incident, from a fieldwork diary, provides a snap shot of children’s experiences in the classroom. Dissatisfaction with drawing is not uncommon with this age group and some literature and research on children’s drawings suggests that children show a decline in drawing confidence as they mature. Cox (1991) for example, noted that children began to express greater dissatisfaction with their drawings around age seven and Gardner (1982) suggested that, while young children seemed to be driven by some internal dynamism, adolescents lacked enthusiasm about acquiring arts skills. Analysis of children’s drawings led Kellogg (1979) to note a decline in drawings amongst eight-year-olds. Kellogg (1979) and others have investigated and documented children’s graphic development (for example, Butterworth, 1977; Di Leo, 1977; Eisner, 1972; Gardner, 1980; Lowenfeld, 1959; Piaget & Inhelder, 1959; Wilson & Wilson, 1982). Research on graphic development has provided us with a greater understanding and appreciation of the developmental stages and special characteristics of children’s drawings. As educators we have come to value both the representational images and earlier mark making of young children. In doing so, I suggest, we have elevated the status of young children’s art to a level where we lament the passing of these drawing stages into more developed art forms. We watch as our children become less satisfied with their drawings and choose not to draw. As teachers we seek to make sense of this reluctance to draw, by observing children and reflecting upon our childhood experiences. In doing so we create theory about the reason for children’s decline in drawing confidence. What has developed in our culture is a pervading commonsense view that attributes a decline in drawing confidence and enthusiasm to adult messages, especially those from teachers. Kellogg (1979) for example attributed the decline in drawings amongst eight-year-olds to inappropriate adult pressure, lack of positive messages and poor teaching practices. Despite these prevailing views little research has been undertaken with children to explore the relationship between art confidence and messages. The fact that children usually progress through school in class groups, sharing similar social experiences and messages, and yet they do not display the same level of art confidence, suggests that development of art confidence is both complex and dynamics. Self-efficacy theory, which is defined by Bandura (1986, p. 139) as “people’s judgements of their capabilities to organise and execute sources of action required to attain designated types of performances,” helps to explain why people with similar experiences behave and act in different ways. Therefore drawing self-efficacy is concerned with people’s judgement of their own drawing capabilities. Research involving four to nine-year-old children was undertaken to investigate drawing self-efficacy, and role of messages in informing drawing self-efficacy (Richards, 2003). Children receive a variety of verbal and non-verbal messages about their drawing competence. Bandura (1986) suggests four sources of self-efficacy information. These are experience, verbal persuasion, vicarious experience and emotional state. Previous drawing experiences, both positive and negative, are the most influential on drawing self-efficacy. Those with a history of successful drawing experiences are likely to view any subsequent difficulties as easily overcome, while those with previous low success are likely to believe they lack drawing ability. When children see others succeed or fail at a drawing task they are influenced by the vicarious experience. Successful modelling is important and can raise self-efficacy and weaken the impact of past failure (Bandura, 1986). Verbal persuasion can be effective, if set within realistic bounds (Bandura, 1986), and children who have positive drawing self-efficacy are most influenced by positive comment, while those with low self-efficacy are most affected by negative comments (Bandura, 1986). The emotional state of a child can also influence self-efficacy beliefs. DRAWING SELF-EFFICACY RESEARCH Procedures Questionnaires, interviews and observations were used to investigate the drawing self-efficacy levels of 136 children who attended the morning session at a kindergarten, and the new entrant to year four classes of a nearby school. The questionnaire, which comprised 36 items in 8 sections, was based on the four sources of self-efficacy information, and the behaviours associated with self-efficacy. The questions were read aloud, generally prompting a yes or no answer, and a second question gauged the degree of the response. Responses were designated a number from 1 to 4 and a drawing self-efficacy level was gauged for each child. Following the questionnaires, kindergarten children were interviewed and observed while engaged in art activities. At the school, children at either end of the drawing self-efficacy scale were invited to participate in interviews and observations. School observations took place during drawing lessons, which were taught by the class teacher. QUESTIONNAIRE RESULTS Drawing Self-Efficacy Levels It was possible to score between 36 and 144 on the drawing self-efficacy questionnaire and scores ranged from 70 to 138. The mean was 109, which indicated that over half the children had quite high to high drawing self-efficacy. While the main effect for Year Level or Gender was not statistically significant, there was a significant Year Level by Gender interaction effect, F (5, 124) = 4.94, p < .01. As Figure 1 shows there was considerable overlap in scores for boys and girls at kindergarten, year one and year three. Year two boys were around three-quarters of a standard deviation unit higher than the mean. The new entrant boys were almost one standard deviation unit below the mean, and the year four boys were 1.25 standard deviation units below the mean. Analysis of the eight sections of the questionnaire revealed statistically significant differences, as displayed in Table 1, for preferences, vicarious experiences, emotional responses, effort and persistence, and levels of difficulty. Preference showed a significant main effect for Gender, F (1, 124) = 6.73, p < .05, with girls reporting more positive preferences for art activities than boys. There was also a significant main effect for Year Level, F (5, 124) = 2.35, p < .05. Year Level Yr 4 Yr 3 Yr 2 Yr 1 New Entrants Kindergarten Es tim at ed M ar gi na l M ea ns 120