School Art – Henry Ward

The artist began by walking around the school site, taking with her a group of 6^th formers, exploring both the areas populated daily by the students, and those places that were out of bounds or overlooked. Upstairs, in a corridor usually accessed only by staff, she came across a display of photographs of the school throughout its history; fading black and white class shots; sports team photos; newspaper cuttings and press events. This display, previously unseen by the students, caused understandable excitement and interest. A day or so later the artist went in search of the caretakers to ask if she could have access to the displays. Ideas were beginning to form about the possibilities of working with these artefacts. The caretakers pointed out that the photographs were from the school archive and that it was full of such stuff. They took the artist to the storeroom where this archive was kept and left her to it. This was the beginning of a very exciting project.

The artist began to explore the records in the archive, poring over the registers and reports from the history of the school. Studying the photographs and forming an idea of how the school had changed over the last eighty or so years. She photographed the documents she was researching, re-photographed the photographs she found, and began her own record, her own chronology. For some reason the 1950s seemed to bear the most fruit. These records were the most detailed. There were more photographs. She discovered that the school had originally been two schools, a boy’s site and a girl’s site, sharing the same grounds. She began to come across the names of some of the students in several different contexts and started to wonder whether it would be possible to get in touch with any of them? Whether any of them still lived locally? What had happened to them after they had left? She also spoke to current students. Did any of them have relatives who had come to the school?

At this point it is worth explaining something about Welling School (1). Welling is located in the London Borough of Bexley on the outskirts of London on the borders of Kent. Although Welling is considered part of London, it has a Kent postcode. You can catch a train from the local station and be in the centre of London in half an hour. Yet, despite this proximity to the city, Welling is a very parochial place. Many of the students that come here do indeed have parents who also came to Welling school. Some of them even have grandparents who were Welling students. The artist had stumbled upon an unusual phenomenon in this day of transient populations where people often settle in different areas to those in which they were raised.

In discussions with students the artist made arrangements to interview some of their relatives about their experiences of the school. She also began to research online, using sites such as Friends Reunited (2) to track down some of the people who had been students at Welling in the 1950s. She completed a series of interviews. In some cases ex-students were able to come in. She interviewed them and filmed the interviews. But in other cases, most notably with a woman who had emigrated to New Zealand, she conducted the interview over the telephone and made an audio recording. The interviews provided her with a wealth of new information. A wonderful collection of anecdotes and contradictions. A number of possible directions began to suggest themselves. The interviews had introduced elements that suggested ways in which the artist could progress. Several ex-students talked about the separate schools. Apparently the shared playground had strict rules. The girls and boys were forbidden from mixing together. There was an ‘invisible’ line over which they were not allowed to cross. One ex-student mentioned how they would wait for foggy weather and then break this rule and cross the line to see the boys. A school clock was talked about. This was the spot where naughty students were sent to stand whilst waiting to see the Head teacher. Each Christmas, as a tradition and annual treat, the same film was screened in the school hall. There had been a school hymn, sung at every assembly. A house system with the houses named after famous British ships. Slowly a picture of the school in the 1950s was beginning to form. The artist began to put together plans for possible pieces of work. The value of the recorded interviews was evident, but so too was the information that had come about as a result of them. The very real idea of making work which left a lasting impression on the school and in which students were participants began to take shape.

One proposal was to re-instate the ‘invisible’ line. This time making it a tangible thing. An actual line that would bisect the school site and serve as a visual reminder of the separate schools that had eventually become one. Something akin to the black cobblestone line marking the location of the wall in Berlin (3). The notion of employing the entire student body to segregate themselves by gender, with boys on one side of the line and girls on the other as a performative and collaborative event was put forward.

Another proposal was to screen the film, that had traditionally been played every Christmas, and utilise the school hall, inviting the student body to view it. A third suggested the re-introduction of the school hymn in assemblies. All these proposals investigated ways in which the students themselves could participate and collaborate on the project.

At the same time the artist had begun to make other pieces, employing the photographs she had taken in the archive. She made videos of her attempts to erase these images, incessantly working with an eraser to rub away the past. She also began to experiment with the audio and video recordings of the interviews. These recordings led to the creation of a series of audio pieces in which the voices from the past have been edited together, overlapping and blurring into one another so that certain phrases and anecdotes are repeated and stand out. Whilst working with some of the students in the cross-curricular studio, which doubles as a storage space for the things that we do not know where else to put them, she discovered a pew, the last physical remnant of the old school, complete with the school crest and Latin motto inscribed upon it. The resulting work combined this found object with the audio recordings. Presented in an exhibition in the on site gallery current students and staff were invited to sit on the pew and listen to the voices from the past talking about their time at the school. Alongside this piece, she exhibited the collected registers from the 1950s, displayed in a vitrine in the manner of a museum. She also created a plaque, commemorating the years that the girls’ school had existed.

This engagement with the school, with its history and stories, the use of artefacts and objects that have such a resonance made this project incredibly successful. A testament to the importance of art practice within the school environment. Especially where the practice engages with the school itself. Art plays an incredibly important role within the curriculum. So much of our education system seems to be aimed at ensuring that students leave with a prescribed body of knowledge, but art is one of the few areas where students are required to question and explore things for themselves. The opportunity to view, and participate in, such a substantial project within the school institution is invaluable. Watching an artist investigate the environment she is working in, seeing her develop ideas inspired by the things that she comes across, is tremendously rewarding for the students. Not least seeing art perform a social function. Projects such as this, projects that involve a community and explore areas of common interest, that operate as socially engaged events are hugely beneficial for everyone in the institution. Whilst this project was in progress a large number of people, both currently at the school and ex-students, became involved, but the project also has a legacy beyond this. The audio pieces, which form such a significant part of the installation in the gallery, can now become part of the school’s archive as well.

This artist is Camilla Price. Camilla Price is a sixth form student at the school.

“You can’t teach art but it might help to have really good artists around.”
John Baldessari. (4)

The approach to teaching art at Welling School is a radical one. We have been developing a way of delivering the art curriculum in which the staff and students operate as practicing artists. I do not propose to try and define what an artist is, but within the context of the school environment, and in particular the art lesson, this distinction is important as it moves away from art being a subject in which the teacher has the knowledge and this is transferred to the students over a period of time. Instead we view it as an arena in which a variety of questions are posed, issues raised and outcomes occur. Sometimes these outcomes are made by students, sometimes they manifest themselves in things created by staff and often they result in collaborative projects, instigated by staff or students. This doesn’t mean that we do not plan or prepare for the things that happen, if anything the planning needed is even more meticulous. But it encourages a more open-minded approach to classroom practice. This is not unprecedented, indeed Frank Cizek (5) experimented with such methods in Vienna in the 1920s. “What he rejected was the conventional and academic notion of the teacher as the possessor of some wisdom to be transmitted to the child whose mind was, as it were, a ‘tabula rasa’ awaiting the inspiration of prior and predetermined knowledge.” (6) Cizek believed, as I do, that children are capable of making work which can be seen as artwork in its own right and not facsimiles of existing artists’ works. As a member of staff, an artist in the classroom, teachers undertake the role of facilitator. They are responsible for creating the space in which artwork gets made, whether by the students or themselves. They may devise a starting point, pose a question, introduce a material or set a challenge. The students, as the other artists involved, may respond (or sometimes not), answer questions, pose new ones, develop ideas, explore materials and so on. Of course this in turn generates another cycle of activity and so the development of stuff continues. I see this activity, this teaching, as an artistic practice in its own right. Literally pedagogy as an artistic practice. By allowing and encouraging the students to see themselves as artists we create a situation in which, potentially, we have a multitude of artists-in-residence at any given time. The understanding that their ideas are as valid as anyone else and that the things they bring to the classroom, whether that be literally in the manner of objects they have created, or metaphorically, as in issues or questions, are vitally important.

The idea of artists working in schools is an excellent one. Art can play such a vital role, and can have such a significant impact on both the lives of the young people and the school itself. By working in the way we are we have created an environment in which there are many artists-in-residence in the school. Artists who already operate within the machinery of the school institution. Artists who understand the obstacles they need to overcome and who are, by their very nature, bound up in the culture of the institution. So much interesting contemporary art is made in response to specific circumstances and places. Our artist-in-residence are doing this all the time. So what happens when we undertake a project working with an artist from the outside?

Working with external artists can bring different rewards. In a recent project with the ICA (7) we were lucky enough to be invited to collaborate with the Russian collective Chto Delat? (8) As part of their first major exhibition in Britain, the ICA proposed that one of the collective, Nikolay Oleynikov, would work with a school in producing a site specific piece of work, in collaboration with students. A meeting with Nikolay Oleynikov was arranged and we visited the private view of the exhibition and had the opportunity to discuss his work with him, and also what ideas he had for making a piece of work in school. His practice focused on site-specific murals and he was keen to produce something with the students which would remain as a permanent part of the school site. We organised for a small group of students, across all three key stages, to visit the exhibition at the ICA and meet with the artist. The visit was a tremendously rewarding one. The students enjoyed seeing his work in context and being given the opportunity to talk face to face with him about his ideas. He then visited the school and met with the same group of students who took him around the site looking for a suitable location. A large wall in the library was chosen and together, the artist and students, along with a member of staff, began to discuss possible inspirations for a mural. The library is currently undergoing a transition. Re-branded as the Learning Resources Centre (LRC), many of the books are being removed to be replaced by computers. Picking up on this it was suggested that Ray Bradbury’s “Fahrenheit 451” (9) might prove an interesting starting point. A screening of the Truffaut film (10) was arranged and the students and the artist began to draw up ideas. Once a plan for the mural had been agreed, two of the students began to make photographic portraits of staff members, posing as characters from the story. The artist then, in collaboration with the students, began to sketch out the overall plan for the mural. Dates were arranged, a scaffold and materials were organised, and work began. Over two days Nikolay Oleynikov worked in the LRC with various students from the group alongside him, completing a stunningly ambitious piece. The next day he came back to the school and we held an opening event, where he gave a short talk about the project and how it had evolved. As I write this the ICA are in the process of putting together a synopsis of the project for their website, although after the initial introduction and meetings they had no further involvement. Sometimes they manifest themselves in things created by staff and often they result in collaborative projects, instigated by staff or students. This doesn’t mean that we do not plan or prepare for the things that happen, if anything the planning needed is even more meticulous. But it encourages a more open-minded approach to classroom practice. This is not unprecedented, indeed Frank Cizek (5) experimented with such methods in Vienna in the 1920s. “What he rejected was the conventional and academic notion of the teacher as the possessor of some wisdom to be transmitted to the child whose mind was, as it were, a ‘tabula rasa’ awaiting the inspiration of prior and predetermined knowledge.” (6) Cizek believed, as I do, that children are capable of making work which can be seen as artwork in its own right and not facsimiles of existing artists’ works. As a member of staff, an artist in the classroom, teachers undertake the role of facilitator. They are responsible for creating the space in which artwork gets made, whether by the students or themselves. They may devise a starting point, pose a question, introduce a material or set a challenge. The students, as the other artists involved, may respond (or sometimes not), answer questions, pose new ones, develop ideas, explore materials and so on. Of course this in turn generates another cycle of activity and so the development of stuff continues. I see this activity, this teaching, as an artistic practice in its own right. Literally pedagogy as an artistic practice. By allowing and encouraging the students to see themselves as artists we create a situation in which, potentially, we have a multitude of artists-in-residence at any given time. The understanding that their ideas are as valid as anyone else and that the things they bring to the classroom, whether that be literally in the manner of objects they have created, or metaphorically, as in issues or questions, are vitally important.

The opportunities such collaborations with artists offer are fantastic. The ICA had recommended our school to Nikolay Oleynikov precisely because of the approaches we take to the delivery of the art curriculum. Our emphasis on seeing the staff, and students, as practicing artists offered a tremendous opportunity for a genuinely collaborative project. On speaking about the mural, upon its completion, Oleynikov talked about the input that the students had had. He emphasised the way in which the ideas for the project had grown out of the discussions that they had. He talked about his excitement at making a piece of work which he considered as co-authored. The students have also talked about their own feelings of pride and achievement over having worked on something substantial that will remain as a legacy. A legacy left by Oleynikov, who has now returned to Russia, but also a legacy left by them when they too leave school.

In some ways much of this came about in spite of, as opposed to because of, the involvement of the gallery itself. Whilst without the ICA the opportunity to work with Chto Delat? would not have arisen at all, the success of the project was entirely down to the relationship that built up between Oleynikov, the students and the staff involved. After the initial meetings the inevitable bureaucratic obstacles began to appear. It is always difficult to overcome such issues, whether they relate to health and safety, CRBs (11), the purchasing of materials or the timekeeping of an artist unused to working within the constraints of a school day with its bells and tightly organised periods. To some extent the institutions needed to be cut out of the equation. Mobile phone numbers and email details were exchanged between the staff and the artist. The students also shared their emails and further meetings were organised, and jobs shared out. But fairly quickly Oleynikov began to live up to the clichéd pre-conception of an artist. He would promise to be in for nine o’clock in the morning, the students would have permission to be out of their classes, only to have him turn up two hours late, oblivious to the chaos this had caused. The scaffold, originally agreed for one day, had to remain up for three at short notice, again causing friction at school. When Oleynikov took it upon himself to dismantle part of the scaffolding to reach a certain part of the wall, or used one of the wooden library shelves as a makeshift palette, members of art staff found themselves acting as peacemakers, working with caretakers and the librarian to placate them.

Whilst the project with Nikolay Oleynikov was a collaborative one. The students who became involved are, and see themselves as, the co-authors of the resulting mural. Oleynikov did come to the school with an agenda. He arrived with a way of working and this method was, to a degree, imposed on the project. When initially visiting the exhibition at the ICA the students were introduced to the mural work he had made there and the proposal that a similar piece would now be made at school was put forward. The students influenced how the project developed but only within the parameters set out in advance by the artist.

Artists can undertake a variety of roles within an educational institution. Both these projects were of benefit to the people involved with them. Camilla Price’s work is a fantastic example of the huge rewards possible when an artist-in-residence is able to work within an institution for a prolonged period of time. She is now in her seventh year at the school. Such a lengthy residency has enabled her to become fluent in the idiosyncrasies of the institution, to understand the potential pitfalls and bureaucracy, to build relationships with the other people who inhabit it. When interviewed about the project she had undertaken she explained why she was drawn to the school’s history, talking about how developing an understanding of this had made her feel more grounded, that she now feels inspired to want to continue this investigation. The resulting work has inevitably excited the other students and staff. By making work that deals directly with the institution itself and has involved people from its present and past, Camilla has succeeded in producing something which touches people in a meaningful way. Her impact, as an artist working within a school, has been very real, both on the institution and herself.

The legacy left by Nikolay Oleynikov is also a positive one. Artists visiting the school bring with them different cultures, new ideas, other agendas. The students and staff that collaborated with him on this piece gained an enormous amount from doing so, as did the artist himself. Despite coming to the project with an idea of what he intended the outcome to be, Oleynikov undertook the work as a collaboration. His involvement of students and staff and his openness to their ideas meant that elements of the project developed in unexpected ways. This collaboration is important. It avoids the artist becoming the hamster in the cage in the corner of the classroom. The artist-in-residence as a ‘special person’ set up in an on-site studio for students to go and visit. An opportunity for them to see what a ‘real artist’ looks like and behaves. Like some kind of anthropological experiment.

Oleynikov’s mural will remain as part of the fabric of the building itself for many years to come. Long after the students, and perhaps staff, involved have left, other students and staff will still be able to look at it. But by then it will be a mural, with no explanation of how it came about, or direct relevance for those looking at it.

It would usually be impossible for an artist-in-residence to embed themselves in the culture of a school in the manner that Camilla has. Her role, as one of a multitude of artists-in-residence, along with the other students and staff, is very different, and the resulting work more deeply linked to the place in which it is made.

Art is essential as a medium through which we engage more deeply with our environment and ourselves. It has an important social function to fulfil, and this is particularly true within educational institutions. This is not about the use of art as a decorative element, the display of impressive works to inspire. Instead this is about understanding the role that it can play in education itself. Education, not just of the students, but of the artists too.

Welling School is a non-selective 11-18 school. It has been a Specialist Visual Arts School since 2002.
Friends Reunited is a social networking internet site founded in 2000. Its primary aim is to enable people to contact friends and colleagues that they have lost touch with.
Berlin Wall Memorial. To celebrate the 20^th anniversary of the demolition of the Berlin Wall, a line of black cobblestones was installed to mark the original location of the wall.
Jones, Lesley and Morgan, Jessica. 2009. Pure Beauty. London: Tate Publishing
Frank Cizek founded an Art School for children in Vienna in the 1920s
Malvern, S.B. 1995. Inventing ‘Child’ Art: Frank Cizek and Modernism in The British Journal of Aesthetics, Vol.35, No.3, July
The Institute of Contemporary Arts. London. Founded in 1946 as a centre for showcasing contemporary art in opposition to the Royal Academy.
Chto Delat? Are a Russian political collective of artists and writers. Founded in 2003.
Fahrenheit 451. First published in 1951. Ray Bradbury. A dystopian novel set in the future where firemen are employed to burn books.
Fahrenheit 451. 1966. Directed by Francois Truffaut.
Criminal Records Bureau. The CRB service enables organisations in the public, private and voluntary sectors to make safer recruitment decisions by identifying candidates who may be unsuitable for certain work, especially that involve children or vulnerable adults.

Published in Engage Journal 27. Spring 2011