Publication Date
In 2024 | 0 |
Since 2023 | 0 |
Since 2020 (last 5 years) | 0 |
Since 2015 (last 10 years) | 0 |
Since 2005 (last 20 years) | 2 |
Descriptor
Source
Arts Education Policy Review | 4 |
Author
Hope, Samuel | 4 |
Wait, Mark | 1 |
Publication Type
Journal Articles | 4 |
Reports - Descriptive | 4 |
Opinion Papers | 2 |
Education Level
Higher Education | 1 |
Audience
Practitioners | 2 |
Administrators | 1 |
Policymakers | 1 |
Teachers | 1 |
Location
Laws, Policies, & Programs
Goals 2000 | 1 |
Assessments and Surveys
What Works Clearinghouse Rating
Hope, Samuel; Wait, Mark – Arts Education Policy Review, 2013
Assessment is essential to all forms of work in the arts. Successful arts assessment concepts, patterns, and methods have evolved over many centuries. They are inherent in all arts teaching and central to art-making at all levels of proficiency and sophistication. And they work: achievements in the arts are among the highest in civilization. At…
Descriptors: Music, Student Evaluation, Music Education, Academic Standards
Hope, Samuel – Arts Education Policy Review, 2007
Past successes in music education and teacher preparation must not cause us to ignore the nature and potential of present policy influences and strategic challenges. For a successful future, we must fervently protect certain ideas and conditions often obscured by illusions about present circumstances, possibilities, and powers. Illusions in areas…
Descriptors: Music Education, Educational Policy, Educational Planning, Strategic Planning
Peer reviewed
Hope, Samuel – Arts Education Policy Review, 1995
Asserts that it is important to avoid bandwagon superficialities related to the interdisciplinary approach to arts education in the K-12 curriculum. Concludes that the overarching issue related to the National Standards implementation is how to keep content and process in a productive relationship. (CFR)
Descriptors: Aesthetic Education, Art Education, Cognitive Processes, Curriculum Development
Peer reviewed
Hope, Samuel – Arts Education Policy Review, 1996
Argues that the centralized, bureaucratic model of education management has created more problems than solutions. Contrasts the current situation with an earlier model defined by local autonomy and personal commitment. Explores a broad set of issues and approaches designed to make arts education more autonomous and less divisive. (MJP)
Descriptors: Aesthetic Education, Art Education, Community Control, Community Involvement