對大學藝術通識教育方向的一些思考

Some Thoughts on the Role of Art in General Education Istrucation

吳方正(Fang-Cheng Wu)

《通識教育季刊》 3卷4期 (1996/12) Pp. 13-26

https://doi.org/10.6745/JGE.199612_3(4).0002

摘要

高等教育藝術通識課程是大學全人教育的一環，它延續小學與中學的普及藝術教育，對大多數人而言它是進入社會前最後的系統化教育機會。藝術教育有其極限－它無法強行灌輸與整體社會文化脫節的美感觀念，也無法脫離社會發展程度單獨解決知與行差距的問題。所以藝術教育必須配合整個社會發展的背景，但是也必須走在客觀條件所構成的環境之前，同時也應是能引發受教者主動思考，獨立判斷的藝術教育。
透過“相關學科高深研究的大學學者，科學家與傑出人士參與課程規劃”而成形的DBAE理論，課程內容包含藝術製作，美學，藝術批評及藝術史，其企圖之一是將傳統的自我表現式創作移出藝術教育的核心位置。此一理論基本上是對應中等教育階段的，但基於高中與大專的通識教育在本質上並沒有很大的差異，DBAE廣泛的涵藝範圍足以作為通識藝術課程的基本架構。
DBAE理論中課程不可分割，而作為其基礎的學科卻有分隔性。學科在課程上的整合需要藝術教育者。國內移入這種四學科並重的藝術教育的關鍵在於必須有足夠的學科專家配合。而藝術教育應用藝術相關的基礎學科，不論我們選擇何種教育方向，都不能躲避藝術教育中各階段環環相和的事實，各藝術相關學科的學業教育發展達到相當的程度才有可能回饋普及藝術教育。小學中學與大學都需要普及的藝術教育，基於高等藝術教育在整個藝術教育體系內的近程與遠程影響力，我們須要根本改造高等藝術教育。

並列摘要

Instruction in art represents an important facet of the general education curriculum at the university level. It extends the teaching of art begun at the elementary school and middle school level, and for most students represents their last chance to receive systematic training in art before entering society. Instruction in art has its limits-it is unable to inculcate an aesthetic perception disconnected from the society and culture the students belong to; it is also unable to ignore sociat developments and solve its own problems on its own. Therefore, instruction in art must conform to the realities of social development, but at the same time must also stimulate the abilities of independent thought and independent judgement in those who are instructed.
Based on the DBAE (Discipline-Bases Art Education) theory, developed as a result of curriculum planning by university scholars, scientists and other outstanding individuals in relevant fields, courses in art include Art Making, Aesthetics, Art Criticism, and Art History. The goal of this is to transfer the traditional creative process of individual expression out of its central place in art instruction. Basically, this theory is designed to fit the middle level of education, but based on the fact that general education does not differ significantly in high schools and universities, the broad coverage of the DBAE theory should enable it to provide a basic structure for general education courses at the university level.
The courses involved in the DBAE theory may not be divided up, but the disciplines as base of art education are quite distinct. The merging of these disciplines at the classroom level requires the participation of art educators. The key to successful DBAE lies in cooperative efforts of specialists from different disciplines. In order to develop general art education, each discipline must attain a certain standard in terms of its professional growth. Elementary schools, middle schools, and universities all need general art education. Regardless of the methods and goals of art education, we must point out the inter-relatedness between each art education level. Based on the short-term and long-term implications of high-level art instruction in the context of the entire art curriculum, we need to make basic changes in such high-level art instruction.