Abstract
As academics and scholars, we all hope the work we do contributes to a conversation, and that the conversation itself is long lasting. In the field of psychological and educational research on the arts, where research necessarily intersects with practice, and where the hard work of interdisciplinary thought is critical, few researchers have contributed more than Professor Ellen Winner. It is not enough to simply state Ellen’s publishing statistics, grants awarded, or students placed in their own research lab positions. Her work—the research, ideas, and view of a field—not only form a foundation for much of the research on child development and the arts happening in multiple fields today but has shaped and changed major conversations in the arts on multiple occasions. It is for these reasons that we are honored to bring together a collection of 14 papers characterizing, contextualizing, celebrating, and commemorating Ellen’s work and contributions.
While the content and quality of an individual’s work is most important, publication statistics and the listing of works can provide an important metric of an individual’s expertise and influence. Here, it is obvious to see Ellen’s impact. As of May 1, 2019, Ellen’s h-index is 75 (meaning she has 75 papers that have been cited at least 75 times), her i10-index is 180 (which denotes authorship on 180 papers with at least 10 citations), and she has been cited 20,918 times. These numbers will continue to grow over the months and years following the publication of this special issue. She has been an active researcher since 1982 and has published more than 300 papers, chapters, and books. Her books, which are widely read both within and outside of academia, include Invented Worlds (1982); The Point of Words (1988); Gifted Children (1996); Studio Thinking (2007); Studio Thinking 2 (2013); Art for Art’s Sake (2013); Studio Thinking From the Start (2018); and How Art Works (2018). In each of these books, Ellen takes the broad view on children’s thinking and the arts, investigating them and the research behind each phenomena with thoroughness, creativity, and a view of the future.
Each work aligns nicely with different eras and foci of Ellen’s research life; eras and foci that are echoed in this special issue. Invented Worlds and the three Studio Thinking books take on children’s thinking and engagement during art creation. Why do children engage in art? What are they doing while they make art? What kind of art do they make, and why? These questions—unique even in their posing—are well answered through careful study, mixed methodologies, and practical information that can be used by researchers, teachers, and artists alike. The Point of Words and Gifted Children, although about very different topics (children’s early understanding of linguistic metaphor, and precocious children from a variety of domains, respectively) present entirely new readings of the research literature, bust through widely held myths, and come to central conclusions that shake the ways in which developmental psychologists think of children’s abilities. For example, children do not need to have sophisticated linguistic abilities to understand metaphor. They engage with the world nonliterally all the time, early in development, and with an eye toward a more complete understanding of the world. Likewise, gifted children in various domains (music, science, and math) are not forced into practice by their parents, nor are they fully formed, globally gifted and adult-like in their capacities immediately. Instead, they are driven by a rage to master their chosen world—bringing full orchestral scores to the symphony, or turning every activity they engage in to an algebraic equation. Art for Art’s Sake (and, earlier, the special meta-analytic issue of Journal of Aesthetic Education, Winner & Hetland, 2000) point out that the nail upon which many advocates wish to hang their hat—that engaging in various art forms leads directly to better academic outcomes—does not, and cannot, stand. Sophisticated statistical analysis and a clear headed view of the literature show only a few small areas in which engaging in an art form leads directly to an academic outcome. Art should be engaged in for other reasons– and if there is an academic outcome, it’s a bonus, or extra. And Ellen’s most recent book, How Art Works, takes a broad view of the field, from childhood to adulthood, from philosophical theories to experimental lab studies, for how our minds and brains understand art, process art, think about art, and desire art. This book in particular brings together many of the themes previously explored in other works—metaphor and transfer, modes of thinking unique to the arts, and ways of creating and responding to art works.
It is also important to note how easy these books, and all papers written by Ellen, are to read. She is a wordsmith in addition to being a thinker. The combination of those two factors is not as common as would be hoped. Her works are rich in illuminating details, examples, and anecdotes, with explanations of complicated experiments and statistical findings that make sense, even if you’ve never read the original paper. Reviewers of her books note she is a “significant contributor” to conversations, and her books provide a “wonderful overview” (review of The Point of Words, Gibbs, 1989). Studio Thinking has been featured in multiple New York Times articles, and several major newspapers have published multiple editorials authored by Ellen and coworkers. Her books are called “ambitious,” “unusual,” and having “practical import” (review of How Art Works, Bloom, 2018). The best statement of the beauty and impact of her work may be: “The next time someone asks me what the psychology of aesthetics is about, I will lend them my copy of Ellen Winner’s beautiful book” (review of How Art Works, Smith, 2019).
Ellen is not only a scholar in her own right, but she is an excellent teacher and mentor. We have both seen her influence in these areas in our own lives, as she mentored and taught both of us through doctoral degrees, developing our research programs, teaching our first classes, and now in our own careers as Professors running research laboratories on the arts. The courses she teaches at both the undergraduate and graduate levels are richly immersive and induce critical thinking. Her support of student work is strong, and her mentoring is intensive. She is able to create ideas, lead students to think of their own work through a new lens, and organize disparate thoughts into coherence. Her edits on student papers are legendary, but both of us say with the strongest confidence that without her, we would have been lost in the weeds of academia. Ellen has no fear of publishing a work that will be roundly and publicly criticized and debated, but not for the sake of publicity or fame. Ellen’s work is always in the service of discovery, of truth, and of understanding.
The future of arts research is made stronger by Ellen’s essential work. For example, the question of “what does arts education do for children” is no longer focused centrally and stubbornly on far transfer from art form to test score. Now there are multiple research lines on what characteristics endemic to each art form lead to different kinds of thinking patterns and skills, why aesthetics and artistic skills are important in their own rights, and where the mechanism within the art form may lead to the nonart outcome. Research on gifted children is not just focused on simple practice of a skill, but on how that practice is focused, dedicated, and guided by a rage to master a domain. And our understanding of the value of art, its inherent characteristics for audiences, how adults and children alike focus on the artists’ intention, and the use of metaphor looks to how interpretation, over aesthetics, over pure perception, matters.
We hope we’ve have illustrated to the reader of the worthiness of this special issue and its topic. However, these papers will be interesting and useful not just for fans of Ellen Winner and her discoveries but for all ESA readers. The articles presented herein cover topics of broad interest to anyone who thinks, studies, and writes about child development and arts, philosophical and psychological understanding of art, and effects of art engagement on our minds.
Therefore, we are thrilled to present 14 articles in this special issue honoring Ellen. The articles contained here cover four broad issues roughly approximating her prolific career: Ellen’s mentorship style and influence; Studio Thinking and Art Education, children’s drawing and development, and finally work on responses to art, including thinking about metaphor and ownership. In each of these fields, Ellen has made major advances and her work has a long echo. It seems only fitting to include all.
We begin with an essay by von Karoli, a former student of Ellen’s, who discusses her journey as Ellen’s student, work with gifted children, and the importance of myth busting in Ellen’s work. She highlights Ellen’s generosity to students (something we agree with deeply). We then move to discussions from Simonton and Sawyer. The first on how Ellen’s work informed and helped progress his own thinking on artistic talent and creative life cycles, and the second on how Ellen’s ability to work at the intersection of fields is a creative way to find new problems and think about remote associates between topics.
Next is Perkins’ work on how Ellen’s work on the question “Why teach art” has informed and transformed a field, and where answers to this question should head into the future. This essay leads us into several discussions of Ellen’s foundational and field defining work on art education, and the Habits of Mind that are learned through involvement in studio art. What began as a response to a series of meta-analyses finding no strong causal linkages between arts engagement and academic outcomes has turned into model work on how researchers should investigate what the arts “do” for children (and has turned into a mini-methodological advance in its own right, with “Habits of Mind” style investigations currently occurring in Theatre, Music, and for younger children). Hetland, Sheridan, and Veenema, original collaborators with Ellen on the Studio Thinking projects, and accomplished arts researchers in their own rights, discuss the phases and methods to this work, its impact and Ellen’s role. A fascinating insider’s view for anyone interested in this work. Then, Tishman writes about a large-scale project involving children’s map making, focusing on how the Studio Thinking framework can be applied to a real world, rich and expressive artistic data set. The reader can see just one of the myriad of influences Studio Thinking has had. Berenhaus and Cupchik then explore the philosophical groundings of the Habits of Mind, and their connection to all facets of life, including scientific thinking and cultural problems.
Then, we turn to children’s drawings and understanding of art, and what this implies for their minds. Harris looks at how children’s imagination intersects with their drawings, and the developing ability to understand what is real and what is not, while simultaneously being able to bring the unreal into representational reality. Allen and Freeman discuss art education and children’s developing understanding of the mind and intention behind a work of art.
Next, we look at how Ellen’s contributions on children’s giftedness, and particularly her exploration of gifted children and intelligence, has contributed to the broader field of expertise and intelligence. Sternberg focuses in on gifted children and different kinds of intelligence, writing on how society has shifted focus towards a too narrow definition of intelligence, brilliance, and giftedness.
Ellen has not just focused on developmental psychology when it comes to art, and our final few papers look to the work she has done with adult understanding of art works as well (as her latest book focuses on this topic). Kennedy et al. discuss the various ways in which artists have used metaphor to create for viewers through a close look into artists’ drawings of flying-gallops and foreshortening when drawing horses running. Rabb and Brownell reflect on how both art and metaphor, both areas of contribution from Ellen’s previous and current work, are valuable models for thinking about communication in culture. Then, Friedman writes on art and ownership, particularly how the creation of art affects beliefs about ownership.
Finally, we end our special issue with a fitting tribute from Howard Gardner, Ellen’s partner in scholarship, work, and life, who paints a personal picture of Ellen’s lasting influence and great achievements by sharing his reflections on her importance. We think you’ll find it a moving piece.
We thank Empirical Aesthetics in the Arts editor Marcos Nadal for the opportunity to guest edit this special issue in honor of Ellen, and to all of the authors for answering the call to celebrate Ellen’s large and looming contributions across so many fields. And of course, to Professor Ellen Winner, advisor, mentor, inspiration, and friend, we thank you for bringing both of us from scared but passionate early graduate students, through the gauntlet of research, conferences, publishing, mentoring, grants, job markets, job markets again, starting families, and going up for tenure. Neither of us would be anywhere near who we are today without her in our lives. We are both forever grateful that we lucked into her lab and under her wing.
We are honored to bring this special issue to you and to her, and only hope it can begin to contain the extraordinary life of Professor Ellen Winner. Although she keeps promising to retire and stop writing books, we are still excited to see what’s next.