f [art critical] learning as a major responsibility," the change is slow in coming (133). In the average American school, in grades ranging from kindergarten through high school (K-12), very little time is devoted exclusively to the study of art. Researchers have found that teachers dedicate an average of only 29 hours per year exclusively to art instruction. Studio production accounts for 56% of this time, and the remainder is allocated among art history, art criticism (10%), and aesthetics (Mims and Lankford 90). This comes to 3 hours per year devoted to art criticism, and Mims' and Lankford's categories were very broad. In their study, the incorporation of art critical concepts into the teaching process was, according to self-report, attempted by a number of respondents. But, in general, this appears to have amounted to little more than encouraging students to view their own, and others', work in terms of the level of technical accomplishment. This approach is best described by McSorley, in her study of primary school generalists' conceptions of teaching art criticism. Teachers, she found, tend to view their role in "the learning process of students . . . as one of advocacy rather than as a formulated interaction" (McSorley 165). This, however, is only the view of teachers who are well disposed toward the notion of art criticism in education. Other teachers, confusing two meanings of the word "criticism," have even interpreted art criticism in education as, "having teachers and students make negative remarks about works of art" (Wolff and Geahigan 134). There is, therefore, a need to clarify the concept, and convey a sense of its value.
The idea of employing art critical concepts in education derives from an understanding of art education as a complex, and vital, process. Rather than relegating art instruction to a minor frill in the educational process, many scholars now claim that, as with other subjects, "the purpo...