Creative Osmosis: Teacher Perspectives of Artist Involvement in Professional Development


This inquiry examined the impact of a professional development program in the arts for teachers offered in partnership with Canada’s cultural institutions and the involvement of artists over a three-year period. The research focused on the teachers’ personal growth and professional practice by employing a multiple-perspectives methodology entitled Integrated Inquiry. Findings indicate that it was the inspirational settings in cultural settings, the creative learning activities with artists, and the opportunities to discuss and reflect on their personal perspectives that promoted the teachers personal growth and professional practice. Participation in a wide variety of creative arts activities in cultural settings increased the participants’ willingness to teach the arts in their own classrooms. These experiences enhanced their tolerance for ambiguity and sensitivity to different learning styles. The reflective journal was a powerful tool for making the practical theoretical. It enabled them to relate arts experiences to learning theory and to develop and nurture new ideas. Major obstacles to implementing the arts in schools are inadequate resources, limited peer support, insufficient expertise to assess student achievement effectively, and lack of time. Teachers could overcome these obstacles by engaging in arts advocacy, developing cross-curricular arts themes, enrolling in upgrading courses in evaluation, and adopting an integrated approach to curriculum delivery, respectively.

Share and Cite:

Andrews, B. (2012). Creative Osmosis: Teacher Perspectives of Artist Involvement in Professional Development. Creative Education, 3, 971-979. doi: 10.4236/ce.2012.326147.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.


[1] Andrews, B. W. (1995). Re-designing the arts curriculum of teacher education: A collaborative approach. Canadian Journal of Research in Music Education, 36, 33-39.
[2] Andrews, B. W. (1997). Assessing the effect of collaborative approach to program delivery in arts teacher education. McGill Journal of Education, 32, 163-176.
[3] Andrews, B. W. (1999). Side by side: Evaluating a partnership program. International Electronic Journal of Leadership in Learning, 3
[4] Andrews, B. W. (2002). Governance and accountability: The effectiveness of teacher provided in-service in a university setting. International Electronic Journal of Leadership in Learning, 6
[5] Andrews, B. W. (2005). Bridge over troubled waters: Policy development for Canadian music in higher education. Music Education Research, 7, 101-118. doi:10.1080/14613800500042166
[6] Andrews, B. W. (2006). Re-play: Re-assessing the effectiveness of a collaborative approach to program delivery in arts teacher education. International Review of Education, 55, 443-459. doi:10.1007/s11159-006-9003-2
[7] Andrews, B. W. (2008a). The odyssey project: Fostering teacher learning in the arts. International Journal of Education and the Arts, 9, 20 p.
[8] Andrews, B. W. (2008b). Integrated inquiry: Transforming multiple research perspectives. In S. Kouritzin, R. Norman, & N. Piquemal (Eds.), Qualitative research: Challenging the orthodoxies (pp. 169-181). New York: Taylor & Francis.
[9] Andrews, B. W. (2010). Seeking harmony: Teachers’ perspectives on learning to teach in and through the arts. Encounters on Education, 11, 81-98.
[10] Arts Education Partnership (2001). Strengthening state-level arts education partnerships. Washington DC: Arts Education Partnership.
[11] ARTS, Inc. & Performing Tree (2000). Profiles of national models of arts and school connections. Los Angeles, CA: ARTS, Inc.
[12] Bailey, E. (1998). Two stories of collaboration and cross-fertilization. Journal of Museum Education, 23, 16-18.
[13] Berghoff, B., Bergmann, C., & Parr, C. (2003). Cycles of inquiry in the arts. Language Arts, 80, 353-362.
[14] Best, D. (1995). Collective, integrated arts: The expedient generic myth. Arts Education Policy Review, 97, 32-39. doi:10.1080/10632913.1995.9935052
[15] Bresler, L. (1992). Visual art in primary grades: Portrait and analysis. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 7, 397-414. doi:10.1016/0885-2006(92)90029-X
[16] Brophy, J., & Alleman, J. (1991). A caveat: Curriculum integration isn’t always a good idea. Educational Leadership, 49, 2-7.
[17] Clark, R. A. (1995). Nurturing art education: The efficacy of integrated arts curricula. Canadian Review of Art Education, 22, 1-16.
[18] Conway, C. E., Hibbard, S., Albert, D., & Hourigan, R. (2005). Voice of music teachers regarding professional development. Arts Education Policy Review, 107, 11-14. doi:10.3200/AEPR.107.1.11-14
[19] Creswell, J. W. (2002). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative and mixed method approaches. (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
[20] Doherty, P., & Harland, J. (2001). Partnerships for creativity: An evaluation of implementation. Slough, UK: National Foundation for Educational Research.
[21] Dorn, C., & Jones, L. (1988). Promoting partnerships in arts education: Teachers, artists and scholars. In J. T. McLaughlin (Ed.), Toward a new era in arts education (pp. 80-90). New York: American Council for the Arts.
[22] Gallas, K. (1994). The language of learning. New York: Teachers College Press.
[23] Government of Ontario (1996). Education quality and accountability act. Toronto, ON: Queen’s Printer.
[24] Government of Ontario (2012). Putting students first act. Toronto, ON: Queen’s Printer.
[25] Gurney, P. J., & Andrews, B. W. (1998). Building bridges: A case study of policy development in teacher education. In A. Richardson (Ed.), International multiculturalism: Preparing together for the twenty-first century (pp. 50-59). Edmonton, AB: Kanata Press.
[26] Gurney, P. J., & Andrews, B. W. (2000). Restructuring faculties of education: State of the nation. International Journal for Leadership in Learning, 4,
[27] Ingram, D., & Reidel, E. (2003). What does arts integration do for students? Minneapolis, MN: Centre for Applied Research and Educational Improvement, University of Minnesota.
[28] Irwin, R. L., & Kindler, A. M. (1997). Beyond the school: Community and institutional partnerships in art education. Reston, VA: National Arts Education.
[29] Jindal-Snape, D., & Holmes, E. A. (2004). A longitudinal study exploring perspectives of participants regarding reflective practice during their transition from higher education to professional practice. Reflective Practice, 10, 219-232. doi:10.1080/14623940902786222
[30] Kindler, A. (1987). A review of rationales for integrated arts programs. Studies in Art Education, 29, 52-60. doi:10.2307/1320456
[31] McVey, M. K., & Wilson, M. (1992). Integrated arts: Transition years pilot project. research project funded by the Ontario Ministry of Education. Ottawa, ON: Ottawa Board of Education.
[32] Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis. (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
[33] Myers, D. E. (1996). Beyond tradition: Partnership among orchestras, schools, and communities. In Cooperative agreement. Washington DC: National Endowment of the Arts.
[34] Ontario Ministry of Education (1998). The ontario curriculum, grades 1-8: The arts. Toronto, ON: Province of Ontario.
[35] Ontario Ministry of Education (2009). The ontario curriculum, grades 1-8: The arts. Toronto, ON: Province of Ontario.
[36] Oreck, B. (2004). The artistic and professional development of teachers. Journal of Teacher Education, 55, 55-69. doi:10.1177/0022487103260072
[37] Osterman, K. (1990). Reflective practice: A new agenda for education. Education and Urban Society, 22, 132-153. doi:10.1177/0013124590022002002
[38] Patteson, A. (2002a). The creative arts learning partnership evaluation report. Toronto, ON: Learning Partnership.
[39] Patteson, A. (2002b). The creative arts learning partnership evaluation report. Toronto, ON: Learning Partnership.
[40] Patteson, A. (2002c). Amazing grace and powerful medicine: A case study of an elementary teacher and the arts. Canadian Journal of Education, 27, 269-289. doi:10.2307/1602224
[41] Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods. (2nd ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
[42] Pitman, W. (1998). Teaching the arts in an age of uncertainty. Toronto, ON: Ontario Arts Education Council.
[43] Rowe, M. K., Castaneda, L. W., Kaganoff, T., & Robyn, A. (2004). Arts education partnerships: Lessons learned from one school district’s experience. Santa Monica, CA: Rand.
[44] Smithrim, K., & Upitis, R. (2001). Strong poets: Teacher education and the arts. Journal of Professional Studies, 9, 19-29.
[45] Stake, R. (1995). The art of case study research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
[46] Taggart, G., Whitley, K., & Sharp, C. (2004). Curriculum and progression in the arts: An international study. Slough, UK: National Foundation for Educational Research.
[47] Upitis, R. (2005). Experiences of artists and artist-teachers involved in teacher professional development programs. International Journal of Education & the Arts, 6,
[48] Upitis, R., Smithrim, K., & Soren, B. (1999). When teachers become musicians and artists: Teacher transformation and professional development. Music Education Research, 1, 23-35. doi:10.1080/1461380990010103
[49] Wilkinson, J. (2000). Literacy, education and arts partnership: A community-system programme integrating the arts across the curriculum. Research in Drama Education, 5, 175-197. doi:10.1080/713692884
[50] Wilkinson, J. H., Emerson, J., Guillaumant, D., Mergler, J., & Waddington, J. (1992). Preservice arts teacher education in Ontario. Report prepared for the Ontario Arts Education Council. Toronto, ON: Ontario Arts Education Council.

Copyright © 2024 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc.

Creative Commons License

This work and the related PDF file are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.