Art & Art History ETDs

Publication Date



Statement of Problem: There have been many studies on student behavior, personality and intelligence in relation to creativity. Also, research has been conducted on methodologies of teaching, but very little has been done on the methodology or how we teach art and its relationship to creativity. This study involved an experiment in carious art activities to determine if there was any difference between a breadth (carried activities and media) and a depth (varied activities with concentration in one medium, paper) method of teaching art in developing greater creativity among sixth grade students.

Hypotheses: 1. There is no significant difference between a breadth versus a depth method of teaching sixth grade art to develop creativity in a child. 2. There is so significant difference in the degree of agreement of the judges as to what constitutes the creativity in the children’s art work.

Research Method: The sample obtained for this study involved two sixth grade classes in a lower middle class caucasian school in a city of the southwest, thus using a cluster sample. The classes had been preciously equalized as to academic ability. Previous studies (Frankston) recommended a depth method for junior and senior high, and sixth grade was selected to see if the depth method was advantageous at this level also. The methodology consisted of 12 lessons, including a pre-test and post-test in design. The lessons for both groups were conducted, on an average, for one hour per week for each group. The control group received lessons in a wide variety of media and motivational experiences. Whereas, the experimental group received lessons involving one basic medium: paper, with a variety of motivational experiences. The designs were judged by two art education instructors at the University of New Mexico and two elementary teachers. Each design was rated on eleven criteria with each criterion being rated on a five point scale (very poor to excellent).

Results: An analysis of covariance gave an F score of 3.91 on the pre-test and post-test scores. This was significant at the 5 % level, resulting in a rejection of the null hypothesis. There was some agreement between judges, but this was not significant, thereby indicating a lack of reliability of the criteria selected for evaluation. An intrarater reliability was determined which was also found to be not significant.

Conclusions: There was some indication from the data obtained that there may be been some gain in creativity using the depth method, but further research is needed. The results of the data showed there was very little consistency in the ratings between the judges. Before research in methodology can continue a more consistent means for evaluating children’s art needs to be developed.



Document Type


Degree Name

Art Education

Level of Degree


Department Name

UNM Department of Art and Art History

First Committee Member (Chair)

Alexander Simeon Masley

Second Committee Member

Catherine Ellen Loughlin

Third Committee Member

Alvin Wendell Howard

Fourth Committee Member

James Gordon Cooper