how can they be ready for that?

I stopped off at UALR while I was in Little Rock yesterday to visit with their woodworking program director and a visiting artist. The visiting artist had been taking students through the lengthy, abstract process he uses for designing work, and a small sketch of proposed work on a board by a student was shown to me as a bad example of the process of design... something that was to be avoided. I was in the awkward position of guest who disagrees with what was being taught. So I tried to politely suggest the dramatic contrast in methodologies between the beginning days of Sloyd and how it is currently practiced in Scandinavia. I often start my projects with no sketch at all. I may have a view in my mind's eye of the joinery to be used, and have some sense of what the wood will look like and how I want the finished object to appear. But I often start projects with few if any of the important decisions made in advance.

Children (here I use the word very lightly as we are all children at times as we learn, full of wonder and making connections with new things) move in their learning from the concrete to the abstract. And those who are involved in science know that one's relationship with the concrete never comes to an end. All scientific speculation must be tested against the hard edges of physical reality. It is the same with art, craft and design.

Piaget, in his theory of cognitive development recognized the time between ages 6-12 as "the concrete operational stage," and some theorists believe that computer gaming has actually delayed arrival of this stage as settings are pre-imagined and gamers work within sets of predetermined conditions set by game designers rather than by physical reality. This means that even at the time of entrance to college, many students have barely emerged into comfortable relationship with the abstract.

Drawing has immense value in the development of concepts and designs. But for beginners, to start with required drawing overlooks the important requirements of understanding the tools and materials and their participation in the creative act. So you put a blank piece of paper in front of a kid and ask him or her to make a bench? You are so much better off giving a kid a board and a saw. From that you will have a much greater opportunity to actually engage the child in creative work.

The director of the woodworking program at UALR is concerned about how to get more students involved. The place was empty but for us on a Friday afternoon, when it could have been packed with noise and activity instead of completely idle. I will offer this... we never outgrow our relationship to the concrete. To focus too strongly on design as being of greater importance than the making is but one more roadblock standing in the way of creativity. I am so grateful that I am able to walk to the barn and pick up a piece of wood and make. If my objective were to become a designer for industry, I may not be in the best position to do that. I would never be engaged with the kinds of materials I use for that. But if my objective is to be a craftsman and maker, actively involved in my wood shop, the relationship between the abstract and concrete is important to me. You start with the concrete, journey into the abstract and then reemerge into the concrete with a finished object which you can share and which becomes the next platform or foundation from which to continue exploration of the abstract.

Unfortunately most schools have journeyed too far from the fundamentals of tools and materials, and it is very hard for our kids to catch up.

I was surprised in my visits to Scandinavia that Sloyd has moved so far from its foundation of engagement in tools and materials. Now, instead of working from models, the children are supposed to work from their imaginations first. Sloyd teachers are told to have their children draw first and then make so that what they make will be more expressive and unique. It is as though participation in the world of the abstract is more important than participation in the real world. But how can children be expressive and unique and express any reasonable level of quality in their work if they have no understanding of the tools and materials first?

Originally, Sloyd was intended as the necessary second step. Play and manipulation of objects in Kindergarten was to lead to the making of useful objects as children matured and became more engaged in the real world as responsible citizens. But children starting out know very little about the materials and their qualities. They know very little about the tools and their uses. They know very little about the geometry of their own bodies in the use of tools. And these things are extremely important parts of the child's engagement in the creative experience.

I can tell you from my own personal experience as a teacher, you can spend a bit of time on design, but children can hardly wait to get their hands on real things. They can hardly wait to test the ways things work or to feel the transformation of materials in their own hands. If you want to build a great program, even at the university level, you start with the concrete by engaging the hands. There is plenty of time for the abstract, if it is all that important, to come later.