CLAT Step 6 - Improve New Works

Question 1

(2) Overall goals of Step 6

Answer 1

1) constructive building up; 2) make imperfect artistic communication more effective

Question 2

Step 6 Process (2 main steps)

Answer 2

1. Follow comforting guidelines for deciding what’s good and bad
2. Choose and design 1 of 3 evaluative processes (and modify if necessary) for the artistic works:
   
   1. a conceptual approach
   2. a recurring cycle of evaluation
   3. an evaluation of Scripture infused arts

Question 3

1. Follow comforting guidelines for deciding what’s good and bad - main points

Answer 3

• Guidelines for designing evaluation and improvement exercises:
  
  1. Trust the local system [for evaluating artistic communications]
     
     • [[see the “Aesthetics and Evaluation” section of research in
       
       • Small (1998): beauty = when relationships communicated by object/gesture align with ideal relationships in mind of perceiver; musicking involves both performing and listening
       • Merriam (1964): Western aesthetic concepts (distance self from object, manipulate form for its own sake) don’t transfer into other cultures; the arts are all one, stemming from same source but just using different materials]]
  2. Evaluate according to effects
     
     • did it have the effects the community wanted?
     • [[Fitzgerald & Schrag (2006): identify signs at work; identify purposes of song; see how well aligned—do the signs effect the purposes?]]
  3. Relax, but keep learning
     
     • watch people’s reactions and listen to what they say, and dip into Step 4 activities related to the genres you’re working with regularly–maybe one activity a week/month
  4. Identify what kinds of evaluation should happen when
     
     • Two points of evaluation: 1) immediately during the creation process, and 2) reflection on a work after presenting it

Question 4

2. Design an evaluative process: Pick 1 of 3 approaches

Answer 4

1. Conceptual approach
2. Recurring cycle of evaluation
3. Focus on Scriptural fidelity

Question 5

Conceptual approach

Answer 5

• use local social structures for providing correction, define criteria by group consensus, identify elements of the event, desired purposes, key people to include in evaluation, reference objects for discussion, and affirm what has been done along with making suggestions for improvement!
  
  • elements to evaluate: space; performance features; message(s); purpose(s)
  • see chart p. 246

Question 6

Recurring cycle of evaluation approach

Answer 6

• community checking with at least 4-5 target audience members and at least 2 older experts in the community ]]
• Use all of the following tests with each of the above people:
  
  • Test for meaning
  • Test for naturalness
  • Test for ownership and accuracy
  • Correct the art work
  • (Re)test for effectiveness: after correcting the artwork, retest with target audience

Question 7

Focus on Scriptural fidelity (evaluate Scripture-infused arts) approach

Answer 7

[[Applied Arts: Petersen, Errington, Errington, & Harris, n.d.]]

• self (artist) check
• consultant check
• community check