Postmodernism in Visual Arts Lesson and Its Reflections on Students
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Postmodernism emerged as a movement that opposed the dominant views of modernism in the field of art. Postmodernism, which originated in architecture and gradually influenced many areas of art, is discussed in this study with a focus on painting and visual arts education. In high school programs in Turkey, it is important for students to be able to examine the past, embrace the present, the era, and the postmodern way of thinking. When the relevant literature was reviewed, it was determined that there is no research on how postmodernism is used in art education in terms of student learning outcomes. The aim of this research is to determine how high school visual arts teachers incorporate the postmodernism movement into their teaching and to identify any changes in students’ interest levels in the course. In this study, a qualitative research method was used, specifically the case study design. The sample of the study consisted of four visual arts teachers who work in one central and three district schools in Yalova province. Two semi-structured interview forms and document analysis were used as data collection tools. The findings were analyzed using thematic analysis. According to the research findings, it was determined that the participating teachers conveyed the artistic and intellectual structure of postmodernism to students through various teaching methods during the lesson process. However, they were unable to achieve all the learning outcomes related to postmodernism. The study also revealed that students demonstrated changes in the methods they preferred to employ in their artwork after learning about postmodernism and being exposed to examples of postmodern art. Moreover, students provided both positive and negative critiques, reflecting their aesthetic perspectives on postmodern artworks. This research is considered important in terms of serving as an example for teachers and contributing to the literature.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".