Conclusion: Evidences of Artistic Thinking in the Schools

  • Pamela Costes-OnishiEmail author


This chapter synthesizes the salient findings of the studies in this book. It argues how the arts can become a resource for educational theory, research and practice. It found that engagement with the arts remains the optimal response in the effective nurturance of skills, dispositions and competencies needed in the education for the future. Placing centrality to artistic thinking in the schools means teaching learners to acquire the habits of mind that lend aesthetic quality to all experiences inside and outside of the arts classrooms. Acquiring the ability of imbuing everyday experiences with aesthetics will develop lifewide, lifedeep and lifelong learning.


  1. Adler, S. A. (1993). Teacher education: Research as reflective practice. Teaching and Teacher Education, 9(2), 159–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Altmann, A., Ebersberger, B., Mössenlechner, C., & Wieser, D. (2019). Introduction: The disruptive power of online education: Challenges, opportunities, responses. In A. Altmann, B. Ebersberger, C. Mössenlechner, & D. Wieser (Eds.), The disruptive power of online education (pp. 1–4). Bingley, UK: Emerald Publishing Limited.Google Scholar
  3. Bresler, L. (2015). Overture: The polyphonic texture of a collaborative book: Personal and communal intersections. In L. Bresler (Ed.), Beyond methods: Lessons from the arts to qualitative research (pp. 1–16). Lund: Media-Tryck, Lund University.Google Scholar
  4. Calderhead, J. (1989). Reflective teaching and teacher education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 5(1), 43–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Chomsky, N. (2015, May 26). On being truly educated. The brainwaves video anthology. Retrieved from
  6. Christo, S. (2017). Disruptive fixation: School reform and the pitfalls of techno-idealism. New Jersey: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
  8. Dewey, J. (1934). Art as experience. New York: Perigree Books.Google Scholar
  9. Flavin, M. (2017). Disruptive technology enhanced learning: The use and misuse of digital technologies in higher education. London: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Gadsden, V. L. (2008). The arts and education: Knowledge generation, pedagogy, and the discourse of learning. Review of Research in Education, 32, 29–61. Scholar
  11. Hatton, N., & Smith, D. (1995). Reflection in teacher education: Towards definition and implementation. Teaching and Teacher Education, 11(1), 33–49. Scholar
  12. Heath, S. B. (2001). Three’s not a crowd: Plans, roles, and focus in the arts. Educational Researcher, 30(7), 10–17. Scholar
  13. Heathcote, D. (2013). Drama as a process for change. In T. Prentki & S. Preston (Eds.), The applied theatre reader. Routledge.Google Scholar
  14. Heikkinen, H. (2016). Drama and citizenship—Devised drama for education. Journal of Social Science Education, 15(4), 32–39. Scholar
  15. Hetland, L., Winner, E., Veenema, S., & Sheridan, K. (2013). Studio thinking 2: The real benefits of visual arts education (2nd ed.). New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  16. Hughes, J., & Wilson, K. (2004). Playing a part: The impact of youth theatre on young people’s personal and social development. Research in Drama Education: The Journal of Applied Theatre and Performance, 9(1), 57–72. Scholar
  17. Korthagen, F. A. J., Kessels, J., Koster, B., Lagerwerf, B., & Wubbels, T. (2001). Linking practice and theory: The pedagogy of realistic teacher education. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Laiho, S. (2004). The psychological functions of music in adolescence. Nordic Journal of Music Therapy, 13(1), 47–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Lazonder, A. W., & Harmsen, R. (2016). Metaanalysis of inquiry-based learning: Effects of guidance. Review of Educational Research, 86(3), 681–718.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Lorimer, M. R. (2011). Arts-infused learning in middle level classrooms. Journal for Learning Through the Arts, 7(1), 1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Magana, S. (2017). Disruptive classroom technologies: A framework for innovation in education. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.Google Scholar
  22. Markovic, S. (2012). Components of aesthetic experience: Aesthetic fascination, aesthetic appraisal, and aesthetic emotion. I-Perception, 3(1), 1–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Parker, W. (2011). Foreword. In M. Baildon, & J. S. Damico (Eds.), Social studies as new literacies in a global society: Relational cosmopolitanism in the classroom (pp. xiii–xv). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
  24. Ponder, C., & Kissinger, L. (2009). Shaken and stirred: A pilot project in arts and special education. Teaching Artist Journal, 7(1), 40–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational researcher, 15(2), 4–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Stake, R. E. (2010). Qualitative research: Studying how things work. New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  27. Stanley, W. B. (2010). Social studies and the social order. In W. C. Parker (Ed.), Social studies today: Research and practice (pp. 17–24). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
  28. Winner, E., Goldstein, T. R., & Vincent-Lancrin, S. (2013). Art for art’s sake?: The impact of arts education. Educational Research and Innovation, OECD Publishing.Google Scholar
  29. Zeichner, K. M., & Liston, D. P. (2013). Reflective teaching: An introduction (2nd ed.). New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.National Institute of Education, Nanyang Technological UniversitySingaporeSingapore

Personalised recommendations