STATEMENT OF TEACHING PHILOSOPHY
Gerald L. Cannon

My teaching philosophy tends to grow out of years of multi-disciplinary instruction at the university level.   As in all disciplines a lot depends upon the nature and sequencing of the course.   In   early courses in any discipline there are essential techniques to be acquired.   What constitutes an "essential" skill must constantly be reexamined, but certain standard   processes, procedures, techniques and/or applications must be addressed.   In addition, and perhaps more importantly, the basic principles that underlie formal organization and issues of content have to be assimilated by the student.   This requires a disciplined commitment to acquire by association of actions and images a substantial understanding of the aesthetics of the medium chosen for expression.

Even more critical in latter stages of development is the fact that this knowledge must be assimilated as non-cognizant behaviors in producing art rather than simply good design or demonstrated technical facility.   This is a more difficult teaching process and develops from subtleties of exposure to new norms, clarifying issues of form and content, breaking of existing patterns of response, and regular reinforcement from peers and teachers.   As I tell my students, "What you learn as principles you may soon forget as facts and simply express as actions.   Good art is not made by following this or any other set of rules, but you can't make good art without somehow gaining understanding of these guidelines of thought."

I feel strongly that it is incumbent upon the teacher to make sure historical and philosophical references to existing art work and ideas from ancient origins to contemporary manifestations are addressed in relation to all coursework.   This is an active, ongoing process, not to be relegated to the art history department alone.   Art is idea, and artists must be able to think and talk about these ideas as viable currency in all modern arts.

If there is any behavioral pattern that I adhere to it is that, since art is to do (not just know) something, students learn art by doing.   They must make a lot of things which we (both of us) can talk about.   I must strike a balance between letting them make decisions and influencing those decisions to be better and better ones.   I must not, however, make those decisions for them or even create assignments that don't allow much chance of failure.

Teaching in highly technical areas, such as those embodying digital technologies, is especially delicate.   The dizzying array of tools and techniques tend to act as a barrier to breaking through to the art making itself.   I emphasize to students that a kind of easy facility is supplied by the tools that can hinder meaningful expression just as facile hand-eye coordination can lead one to protect old patterns rather than find truly viable new ones.   I also force a concentration on the production of a final aesthetic output rather than allowing a student to aimlessly explore the "palette and brushes" that may only produce a kind of tactile therapy.

The end product by which I judge the success of these processes is whether of not the student sees more effectively and translates this vision into strong visual statements that fluently utilize given techniques and principles for meaningful expression in both form and content.