another gem from Nan: design/draft/creative process

[Miss Mousie]

In another thread, Nan wrote:

 

 

I included projects in the you-must-do-a-paper-or-project-for-great-books because TWTM talks about them and it wasn't until I'd seen the process in action that I realized why SWB suggested it.  I didn't let them substitute a project for every paper, but that still left lots and lots of projects.  Sometimes, they decided to write an essay because it would be faster and easier lol.  In case you don't know, there are pretty well-defined steps to the creative process and there is a well-defined design process that people like engineers go through.  Both of those would be things I would want to make sure any especially creative children understood and (in the case of the design process) practised.  Sort of like learning to write up a lab.  In fact, the steps are not unalike.

 

I would love to explore these processes with you experienced folks.  For writing a paper, I suppose the sequence would be:

 

brainstorm

research

outline

draft

revise/polish

 

Am I on the right path here?  Is this what you had in mind, Nan?

 

How is the process similar and different in other areas?  How do you as teacher/mentor guide your children through understanding the steps, and how do you translate them between various pursuits?

 

ETA:  And how does it fit in the TWTM/SWB context?

 

[8filltheheart]

I was just going to add this to my other question about how to nurture love of cultures and languages. I found this post fascinating......but it leaves me trembling in my shoes (ok....right now slippers ;) ). Seriously, I can so deal with math, science,language, and even philosophy even when they are beyond my abilities.

 

But art? Art has no concreteness to it. It is an entirely different way of thinking. I know dd definitely does not think like either her STEM siblings or her language oriented sister. She really thinks in a unique way.

[Nan in Mass]

Well, the process I use for experiment design, writing a computer program, writing a paper, solving difficult math problem, doing a craft project, solving a parenting problem, writing a poem, writing a piece of music, and making a drawing or painting is all about the same, so I'm not sure I understand the differences?  Some of these I have lots of experience in and some little, which might be why I use one method for everything lol.

 

Nan

[Caroline]

I'm with Nan on this one...I am an engineer with a PhD who is also a fiber artist. I have had pieces hang in galleries and shows. I have worked on the design of aircraft wings, experiments, software, laboratories (a few of the MSE labs at GA Tech), curricula, clothes, quilts, and works of art. I approach each with the same method. My sketchbook and my lab notebook are very similar.

[Jaybee]

So would you ladies mind elaborating on the process, i.e., give us a rundown (simplistic if you want) of the general steps? Like Miss Mousie listed or . . .?

[8filltheheart]

So would you ladies mind elaborating on the process, i.e., give us a rundown (simplistic if you want) of the general steps? Like Miss Mousie listed or . . .?

Yes, this is what I am wondering, too. I know that when her brother draws, he grids a rough draft version. But she has a vision of that type of gown she wants to create and then she works with the material to create it.

[mamajudy]

The six phases of heuristic research as described in Heuristic Research by Clark Moustakas (and probably oversimplified by me):

 

1. Initial engagement, where one discovers an intense interest or concern and forms a question.

2. Immersion, where the researcher (or artist) comes to be on intimate terms with the question, living and growing in knowledge and understanding of it.

3. Incubation, where the researcher retreats from the intense, concentrated focus on the question, allowing the subconscious to work.

4. Illumination. The aha! moment in which the question is answered, more or less.

5. Explication, where the answer, if you will, is fully examined, refined and understood.

6. Creative synthesis, in which the researcher puts everything together into some tangible form, such as a narrative or a work of art.

 

Pretty heady stuff!

[TechWife]

This is a good chart comparing the scientific method to the engineering design process. I really think the engineering design process is a great model to use for problem solving of all types. 

 

This is another explanation of the engineering design process, this one from Engineering is Elementary. 

 

I used to have a cool poster about it, but I can't find it right now. I'll post the source later if I can find it. 

 

 

[Miss Mousie]

Well, the process I use for experiment design, writing a computer program, writing a paper, solving difficult math problem, doing a craft project, solving a parenting problem, writing a poem, writing a piece of music, and making a drawing or painting is all about the same, so I'm not sure I understand the differences?  Some of these I have lots of experience in and some little, which might be why I use one method for everything lol.

 

Nan

 

So ... would you say:

 

First, have an idea.

Second, plan how to execute.

Third, execute, and problem-solve along the way.

 

I guess what is tripping me up is that creative pursuits do not necessarily require research (unless you are, say, painting a portrait of Henry I or something).  And, when finished, one does not necessarily have a greater understanding of the subject, except maybe in critiquing one's own work ("I should have made his nose a little less bulbous" or "my color-mixing was off a bit").

 

So what would you say is the benefit, specific to the WTM/Great Books you mentioned, of painting, oh, Emily Bronte?  Or would the project be painting an important scene from whatever book, and the assessment then gauges  whether all the important aspects have been included?

[Miss Mousie]

This is a good chart comparing the scientific method to the engineering design process. I really think the engineering design process is a great model to use for problem solving of all types. 

 

This is another explanation of the engineering design process, this one from Engineering is Elementary. 

 

I used to have a cool poster about it, but I can't find it right now. I'll post the source later if I can find it. 

 

Thanks for the links, TechWife.  I'll check them out.

[Nan in Mass]

So ... would you say:

 

First, have an idea.

Second, plan how to execute.

Third, execute, and problem-solve along the way.

 

I guess what is tripping me up is that creative pursuits do not necessarily require research (unless you are, say, painting a portrait of Henry I or something).  And, when finished, one does not necessarily have a greater understanding of the subject, except maybe in critiquing one's own work ("I should have made his nose a little less bulbous" or "my color-mixing was off a bit").

 

So what would you say is the benefit, specific to the WTM/Great Books you mentioned, of painting, oh, Emily Bronte?  Or would the project be painting an important scene from whatever book, and the assessment then gauges  whether all the important aspects have been included?

 

Hmmm...

That isn't the way I think of it.  I think of it two ways, one sort of internal and one external.  The internal part goes sort of like:

 

-Decide that I want to make something or solve something of fix something

-Mess about until I figure out what I want to make or solve or fix

-Get it that defined - define the problem or figure out what exactly I am trying to do (this might take awhile and include lots of dud ideas) or what the point is going to be

-Gather all the material I can on whatever-it-is (this is the real research stage and usually I am rather obsessed at this point and have trouble settling to do anything else)

-Mess about looking for connections or ways to link the elements of whatever-it-is together or spend time procrastinating and being frustrated or go to sleep until I suddenly have an idea of how to solve or fix or make whatever-it-is.  This is uncomfortable.  I feel like I'm not getting anywhere but I suspect this is when the real work is getting done - it just is the part that happens out of my control where I can't actually see it.

-Work out the details

-Do the work

-Check to make sure it worked

 

This isn't as linear a process as it looks like here.  There is a lot of looping and reiterating and nesting.  This is what happens inside, what it feels like.

 

Externally, I am usually following a fairly set pattern, one I've been taught or have developed.  For example, if I am writing a paper, I come up with a topic, do some research to narrow it down, do bits of writing in my head to get myself started generating ideas, make a list of everything I want to say, number the list, rewrite the list in order, write more bits in my head while I am doing something else, make a rough draft, put it away for awhile, and then rewrite it.  If I am solving a math problem, I write down my givens and unknowns, think about what else I know, think about how to get from the givens to the unknowns, how they are connected, mess about with them for awhile, solve the problem, check the answer by plugging it back in.  If I am solving a family problem, I go through a process very like the process I go through to solve a math problem (figuring out what I know and what I need to know and what exactly the problem is) except there is even more sleeping on it or waiting for inspiration to strike and possibly more talking to other people.  If I am painting a picture, I decide what I want to paint, do a rough sketch, do some more rough sketches to try to get it defined and narrowed down (tracing paper may be involved in some of this as I keep and discard pieces), do some value studies, work out my colours, do a rough painting (still working in my sketch pad), then do the painting, then possibly doing more tries if the first one didn't work.  If I'm painting something real, the whole things often starts with me sitting down someplace and doing a small plein air painting of something, or several.  Then I go back home and start working in my sketchpad.

 

In the case of paintings, the "research"  stage is not me working in the library, but me trying many different things in my sketchpad.  Sometimes it involves me walking around and looking at things to see what they really look like, or me telling my husband as we are driving quick quick give me your phone that cloud over there is just what I've been trying to paint and then plastering myself against the windshield trying to get clouds not trees.  Sometimes it involves me pulling out all the children's books and figuring out how somebody else painted something, or looking for a photo of a sparrow flying on the internet or going to the science museum to draw bird wings or whatever.

 

All of them have an element of research, whether outside research or "internal"  research while I tinker and try and think about everything I know and what else is like this.  All of them have an element of inspiration.  Often, with a commuter program, I would go to sleep thinking about a problem and wake up in the morning knowing how to do something or knowing what was wrong.  If it involves writing or figuring out how to explain something to someone, going for a walk and having phrases echo around in the back of my head while I am thinking about something else works well.  If it is a painting, there is a stage where I draw "faster than the speed of conscious thought", as one of my drawing books put it, or I will solve problems while I am thinking about something else.  Sometimes being in an intense emotional state helps with the inspiration part.  In all cases, I have to have worked on whatever-it-is first, tinkered with it, gathered info, focused on it.  And afterwards, there is usually a lot of implementing and tinkering and fixing and double checking.

 

Not sure how helpful that is.  As far as I can tell, what I do is pretty standard for engineers and artists and musicians and scientists and mothers.  Have an idea, plan the idea, do the work, double check is really more like mess about until things are defined, gather info, mess about some more or procrastinate until things suddenly solidify, do the work, check to make sure it really worked, and as I said, it is seldom as linear a process as that.  This process gets repeated for various bits of the big picture.  Your description is missing the procrastination part and the defining part and a whole lot of the tinkering part - in other words, it is missing both the messy part and the magic part. :)

 

I think part of the reason it is difficult for homeschoolers to teach things like writing and experiment design is that in reality, the process is very messy and involves a lot of not-getting-anywhere.  A school teacher sends the student home to do that part and doesn't have to watch the student staring into space or doodling or trying this and that and this and that.  Homeschooling mothers see this process and have clear memories of their 8yo's daydreaming when they were supposed to be doing their long division problems, or panic when experiment after experiment fails.

 

Nan

[Nan in Mass]

I was just going to add this to my other question about how to nurture love of cultures and languages. I found this post fascinating......but it leaves me trembling in my shoes (ok....right now slippers ;) ). Seriously, I can so deal with math, science,language, and even philosophy even when they are beyond my abilities.

 

But art? Art has no concreteness to it. It is an entirely different way of thinking. I know dd definitely does not think like either her STEM siblings or her language oriented sister. She really thinks in a unique way.

 

What makes you think art has no concreteness?  The artist usually has something they are trying to accomplish, something they are trying to say or something they are trying to make other people feel or something they are trying to capture or show other people.  There is often research involved.  If you want to draw a bird in flight, you need to know what a bird in flight looks like in order to draw a convincing symbol, even one that is highly stylized.

 

How does your daughter think differently?  I know my heavily engineering minded oldest seems to think differently than my middle one, but I'm not sure he really does.  I think it might just be that he expresses himself differently and that he is better at other things and that he doesn't like doing some things or isn't interested in them and hasn't developed them.  It almost seems like they have the patience for different things.  If they talk about something, they will often notice different things about that something, or solve a problem different ways.  That has to do with whether they are focused on the forest or the trees, whether they know how to use brute force to solve something o by referring to previous experience, or whether they are forced to think sideways and try to find something that works like it that might help and improvise.  I think?  Maybe?  Or is it the forest/trees thing that you are talking about?  Has your daughter figured out what works for her yet?  Things she can try to think things through?  My two sons' thinking process looks different externally but I think they both go through the same process that I described?  Maybe I should ask them lol.

 

I don't know.  Interesting to think about, though.

 

Nan

[8filltheheart]

I'm not sure how to describe it. I wouldn't say any of my kids think the same way. Some are more analytical. Some are more plodders/waders into ideas whereas others don't care if their ideas are wrong, they jump in to them with full abandon and express them constantly. This child seems more "in her head." I'm not sure how else to describe it. She clearly has deep thoughts about things but is not as verbal. Her creative side, whether in playing or doing projects, just always "speaks" more. How is that for lack of clarity?

[Miss Mousie]

...  Your description is missing the procrastination part and the defining part and a whole lot of the tinkering part - in other words, it is missing both the messy part and the magic part. :)

 

I think part of the reason it is difficult for homeschoolers to teach things like writing and experiment design is that in reality, the process is very messy and involves a lot of not-getting-anywhere.  A school teacher sends the student home to do that part and doesn't have to watch the student staring into space or doodling or trying this and that and this and that.  Homeschooling mothers see this process and have clear memories of their 8yo's daydreaming when they were supposed to be doing their long division problems, or panic when experiment after experiment fails.

 

Nan

 

What you describe is how I usually work - I just assumed everybody else had a more efficient and reasonable process.  :p

 

And your insight about the homeschooling twist is priceless and, I think, dead-on.   Thank you, a million times.  Your post is going to be one of those print-and-paste-to-my-forehead posts.

[Nan in Mass]

I'm not sure how to describe it. I wouldn't say any of my kids think the same way. Some are more analytical. Some are more plodders/waders into ideas whereas others don't care if their ideas are wrong, they jump in to them with full abandon and express them constantly. This child seems more "in her head." I'm not sure how else to describe it. She clearly has deep thoughts about things but is not as verbal. Her creative side, whether in playing or doing projects, just always "speaks" more. How is that for lack of clarity?

 

(just getting back to this now that I am back from Florida visiting mil, where I had a heavenly time playing in the liquid water)

 

LOL - Actually, that was a very clear description of some of my children.  Much more clear than my muddlings above.

 

I have one that is obviously thinking deeply underneath and not having it surface much.  Homeschooling him was ... interesting.  Figuring out whether to insist he do something was super tricky because if he didn't want to do something, it was hard to tell whether it was because he couldn't do it easily and needed to work on it or whether it was because it was not a good way for him to do something that could be accomplished just as well some other way or whether it was because he could do it perfectly well if he wanted to but didn't see why he had to (since in that case, there was no point in working on it).  He himself did not seem to want to slant his education towards an artistic career.  I don't know if this is because of my family (I explained this in that sold-a-painting thread) or because he really did not want to be some sort of artist.  In the creative sense, he would make a good engineer, but in other ways, he would not, and everybody is pretty much in agreement that getting through an engineering degree would be really difficult for him.  There are lots of things he could do that he doesn't want to do, like theatre or modeling or counseling.  His high school education was me trying to fill in the gaps between what he learned himself peacewalking.  I think it would have been much easier to educate him if he had wanted to be an artist.  I know what is involved with that, more or less, just like I know what is involved, more or less, with educating someone who wants to go to engineering school.  I would sound exactly like you if I had one who wanted to become a physicist. : )

 

If you are having trouble knowing what is involved with an art project, I have a suggestion: see if your library has two books by James Gurney, the author/illustrator of the Dinotopia books.  He also does (or did) illustrations for National Geographic, dinosaurs or scenes from history.  One is Imaginative Realism.  This explains how he does the research for a painting.  The process is complicated.  If, for example, he wants to paint a picture for National Geographic of a cave collapsing on a group of prehistoric men for an article about a recent archaeological dig, he does historical research and then various rough sketches from mock-ups, then works out the design of the painting itself, including the lighting and colours, then works out the painting.  He had trouble getting the poses right until he had the idea of unexpectedly throwing an armful of wrapping paper tubes at his friend (who was modeling for him) and telling him to freeze when they landed on him.   The other is Color and Light, which explains how lighting affects colour and how to paint things lit in different ways.  You wouldn't have to read the books from cover to cover, but you leafing through them would give you some idea of what goes into some sorts of artistic endeavors.  Our library has both.  Hopefully yours does, too, since they aren't exactly cheap.  Actually, they are incredibly cheap (about $25) compared to textbooks, especially when you think of them as containing all the information and advice that one artist wants to pass on to future artists lol.  But for your purposes, you probably will want to get them from the library.

 

Nan

[Nan in Mass]

So what I want to know is how much justification the I-just-want-to-do-it people have for their point of view?  It seems like there are some people who resist planning any artistic endeavor, saying that doesn't work and they do better just writing or painting or whatevering it at the beginning.  I know that I have written papers like this before (usually things due the next day) but what really happened was that I did a minimum of research early on and then a lot of sort of writing bits in my head, so that although it looked like I sat down to write it with no prep whatsoever, that wasn't really the case.  I also know that writing or painting something straight off without any prep is a great way to get started, sometimes.  Doing that shows me what I need to figure out in order to "really" do the project.  In both those cases, though, the finished project went through some stages.  The exception is the occasional "gift" that arrives complete and doesn't feel like it comes from me at all.  As far as I can tell, those things aren't any better than the things produced the normal way.  (Hmm... think I will ask this on my website, too.)

 

Nan