Peer Response

While it is good for students to be independent, I don't know if a) this is a realist way to go about it and b) this is a kind of independence which will serve them well. I like the idea that you bring up, that because "we are in the midst of one of the most conversational presidency our society has seen in quite some time" and the "advancement of technology," students must learn how to face the world on their own and not be afraid. However, I am unsure whether giving students as much freedom as you say will serve this end. It seems that, in such a chaotic world as you describe, giving students a ton of freedom will lead most people to want to escape from that chaos, to escape from thinking about the world, rather than facing it. It seems that a more rigorous approach to education is helpful so that students can learn how to work hard in the real-world and not back down from challenges. From your responses and conduct it seems that you really believe in progressivism, which is exciting! I just think that, as you even acknowledge at the end of your response, that "having a strong essentialism philosophy of hard work and respect to authority can lead to a better ran classroom with excellent procedure," and that, especially in this day and age, this should be the focus of classroom teaching. However, I am sympathetic to your concerns and I think you do a good job of presenting them and of defending progressivism and reconstructionism. As you say, it is true that there is no one right philosophy, and often a blend of teaching styles is what works best. 

Dear [Peer two],

As an essentialist, I think our teaching philosophies potentially come into conflict at some points. However, I think you do a good job of explaining why eclecticism is a good approach to the teaching of art, and how the theories of progressivism, existentialism, and reconstructionism are very well suited to teaching art as opposed to, say, teaching economics or history. I think that in general, teaching art would be meaningless if it did not help students to develop their own creative faculties and to learn how to express themselves and get in touch with their emotional, creative, and sensory faculties. It seems like you have thought a lot about this and have a good relationship to your philosophy of teaching and your classroom teaching practices. As you explain, your "ultimate role as an educator is to expose my students to an overwhelming amount of artistic and creative resources in hopes that they will appreciate and create works that reflect their personalities." This definitely seems to fit in with an eclecticist approach, where the goal is to allow the student much new experience and knowledge so that they can help to find an approach and a lifestyle which works best for them. The one thing that seems worrisome to me is that, in art more than in other subjects, it seems possible for students to slack off and not put proper care or thought into the work while still being able to pretend as if it is a well thought out piece. This is different than a math problem, for instance, where you either do or do not have the correct answer, and it is easy to tell which students need more help, need to be pushed more, etc. In art, this is not the case, and it seems that an eclecticist approach blending progressivism, existententialism, and reconstructionism might not be able to take a rigorous enough approach to helping students challenge themselves and achieve their fullest potential. It seems that art is the subject most appropriate for these blend of philosophies, but also potentially the one which can fall the most into laziness and chaos.