CtU chologicu 32 (1970) 399 ; cj?J Norrh- lhnd Publishing Company Not to be reproduced in any fom without written permission from the publisher

USE OF SHER

PAUL McD3WELE

Brookhaven High School, Columbus, Ohio, U.S.A.

HAPBOLD J. McWHINNIE

Colkge of the Arts, Divi.Gon of Art Education, Ohio State Univevslty, Columbus, Ohio, U.S. A.

ETHODS AND PROCEDURES

Beginning senior high art students at Broo!d~;rLven Senior High School were given a three-week ex~ ,osure to drawing, using the introductory exercises of dr.z=&g from the simple rectilinear shapes used in Hoyt Shtirman’s flash room .method. A second group of students did not use the warm-up exercises but did w from the images flashed upon a screen in the flash room manner. roups were tested on three test drawings. The drawings were rated on a five-point scale by four judges for: (1) feeling for mass of the figural form; (2) sense of plane change in forms used in the figural treatment; (3) sense of plane change used in background treatment; (4) sense of detail and accuracy in figural treatment; and (5) sense of proportion and accuracy in figural treatment.

The purpose of this study was to compare the effects of using the flashed rectilinear shapes as warm-up exercises versus the use of other parts and exercises of the Sherman method, but not the daily warm-Iup slides. Sherman has insisted that the daiiy ithi&; -c.zr,cwp zssions to be an integral part of the total method.

Two beginning art classes were arbitrarily selected for this study. Both classes met for three weeks during this study for one (43 mm) period per day. The group which did not use the warm-up exercises met in the morning and the other group met in the late aftlernoon.

The groups were tested three times during the study, The pre-test (Tl) was given during the first session, the second test (Tz) was at the end of the second week (8th day), and the post-test (Taj was given the last

399

400 ‘PA4n MCDOWELL AND HAROLD J. MCWHImiE ’ , :

session. These test drawings were done in charcoal on newsprint paper from a posed human figure. The judges judged all three test drawings from both groups. Each judge rated the drawings individually on a 5point scale. The drawings were coded, the order, number and mixed so that the judge could not’ know from which time period the drawing came.

Rating sheet. Flash room project I!%!J.

Have

5 4

SCOWS

Some

3 2

Don’t have

1

(1) F&zling for the mass of the figural form. (2) Sense of pIa.nc change in forms used in figural treatment. (3) Sense of g?z~e change used in background treatment. (4) Sense of detail and accuracy in fig;ural treatment. (5) Sense of proportion and accuracy in figural treatment.

The group doing the warm-up exercises using Hoyt Sherman’s simple rectilinear shapes did so after the room had heen blackened thoroughly. After the image -was flashed on the screen, the students were requested to attempt to reproduce what they had seen by feeling for their papers in this totally dark roolm. The students in both groups were asked tea stand whiYe doing their daily drawings.

The slides were flashed on the screen with a carrousel! projector which had 2 x: 2 biank inserts before and after each projected image. The quickest flashing; was achieved by starting the proje:ctor in forward motion with a blank slide and then nob releasing the control until the image bad been shown and the projector had proceeded to the following bhnk, This Bash method was always used with all the warm-up exercises. The other images projected to both g,roups varied somewhat in the amount of timle that image was shown, as well as the number of flashes and the atmount of time between repeated flashes. These slides were

ith both groups and the amount of drawing time given for each grip with each slide was kept the same. During the flashing of some of these slides, i;he image when first flashed would be intentionally out of focus aEd, apon the repeated Bashes or projection.s between the drawing itimes, it would gradually be brought into sharper or proper focus.

fiNALYSIS OF DATA

TAsLE 1

Variance analysis (diffkretlc;~ between time2 and timel).

source I _

df sum of Mean F P squares square ratio value

Group. _ ’ . . . . . . . 1 148.8 148.8 4.94 0.05 sex . . . . . . . . . . . Group >: sex . . . . .

_ error (between). . . . . .

i 10.12 10.12 0.34 I\iS 1 .z 381 5.28il 0.18 NS 7 197.5 7 130.0 7 357.4 7 158.0

28

Judge . . . . . . . . . - 1 3 Group x judge . . . . . 3 Sex x judge . . . . . . . 3 Group x s,ex x judge . . . 3 Error (within) . . . . . .

I 21 21 21 21

842.9 30. LO4 0.45 NS 29.49 9.897 1.53 NS

102.0 34.01 3.50 0.05 232.7 77.56 0.46 NS

30.91 10.30 570.8 340.7 675.3 274.4

I 84 1,861.l 22.16

MEAN VALUES FOR DATA IN TABLE 1

Group 1 (experimental) (difference Ta-TI) Mean -z - 1.896

$D z- 5.031

G10up 2 (control) Mean diff. _: 0.187 SD --: 4..879

According to the above data, the flashroom warm-up treatment produced a negative effect. The experimental. group decreased while controls made some increase. The diffelmences between groups was significant at the 0.05 level.

We also achieved a significant interaction effect between judges and sex, Th,is is shown in fig. 1.

The (data in fig. 1 indicate that two judge: (Jz and 54) were similar in regard to sex and one judge, Js, was very different. This difference accounts for the significant judge x sex within group interaction effect.

402 PAUL MCDOWELL AND HARClLD J. IRCWHIHNIE

Fig. 1. Interaction between judges :md sex. (Mean difference Ta-Tl.)

TABLE: 2

Variance analysis (difference Ta-Ts).

Group. .........

sex ...........

Group x sex ......

Error (between) .... ,,

Judge . a . . . . . . . .

Group x judge . . . . . Szx >( j&ge . . . . . . .

Group x sex x jwdge. . .

Error (within) . c . . . .

Sum of Mean F Y squares square ratio value

1 3.781 3.781 0.12 NS 1 13.78 13.78 0.44 NS 1 3.125 3.125 0.10 NS 7 112.0 7 209.7 7 324.0 7 223.1

28 868.8 31.0128 3 51.81 17.27 1.04 NS 3 12.66 4.22 0.25 NY 3 $2.14 27.47 1.65 NS 3 33.94 11.31 0.68 NS

21 398.2 21 228.8 21 550.8 21 223.8

1 84 QlO1.6 16.685

There were no signikant differerces in the above data.

MXJSSON

The finding of a significant and negative treatment effect on difference s-T1) may be attributed to the following conditions:

(1) Group fatigue: The experimental group met at the end of the school day instead of the first period as with the control group.

(2) Decrease in motivatiorx The nature of experimental treax~ent in- volved a daily series of warm-up slides flashed on a screen for l/lQ second. This may have created a level of boredom which effected per- formance on criterion drawings.

(3) Similarity in treatments: The main difference between treatments (experimenta and control) was in the use of warm-up slides.

This study demonstrates certain problems in measuring the ex.peri- mental efI’ects of the Sherman method of teaching dra-ting-by-seeing. These research and methodological problems are:

(1) The use of standardized psychological tests, especially perception tests, to measure treatment effects on the dependent variables has not been too successful in past attempts. Therefore, in this study we’em- ployed a rating scale to rate the criterion drawings.

(2) The selection of suitable criterion drawing tasks is difficult since, if they are too closely related to the Sherman method, they provide their own source of learning and if they are too remote, they are not sensitive to possible treatment effects. In this present study, the use of the figure drawing as a criterion task may have been tc:o far removed from the basic experimental treatment.

Since there was little difference in the post-test drawings,, the study might have been too long and it became somewhat boring ts the students. The students expressed the fact that many in the group that worked from the rectilinear shapes became quickly bored. This boredom would naturally effect their motivation to attempt to improve their drawings.

It is also possible that the greatest value in Sherman’s flash lab method lies more in the result!; achieved through the flashing techniques and less in the nature itild sequencing of the simple rectilinear shapes.

The difference in the time the classes met may have also been a factor in the results. Note that the room was at its darkes,t, and lacking in good ventilation in the latter part of the school day for the group doing the warm-up exercises.

404 PAUL, MCDOWEL?. AND HAROLD J. MCWHINME

IMPLICATIONS FOR ART EDUCATION

The Sherman method for teaching drawing-by-seeing fulfills many requirements of what would seem to be a very powerful treatment. These are :

(1) it is well-grounded in psychological theory; (2) it has been tried and used successfully for 25 years in the teaching of drawing; (3) it is well-grounded in a study of the drawings of past and present masters ; and (4) it is a very strong and dynamic way of teaching drawing.

The central question which this and other studies have raised is why are the treatment eRects so difficult to assess and measure’? A second question is, does this method depend on Sherman himself? If so, then what does he do that others do not do?

The inherent power of the treatment as well as the fact that on an impressionistic level it does seem to work and work very well makes further attempts to solve the very realistic measurement and methodo- logical problems worthwhile. The basic problem of this and other studies in perceptual learning in art is the question of relevent criterion measures. We need to develop better means of measuring psychological effects on variables which are relevent to the nature of art and to the artistic processes.

REFERENCES

SHERMAN, PI. E., Ihawing-by-seeing. 'SHERMAN, H. L. and I-I. J. MCWHINNIE, The flash-room method-drawing trairiing

for fres!aman architectural students. Acta Psycho]. 31, 158-168.