One of the earliest researchers on the use of video in learning was Ronald Berk. By 2009, he was arguing for the extended use of video in schools and colleges, including the relatively new YouTube platform for serving video online (Berk, 2009).  He suggests that video is “beneficial because it taps verbal/linguistic and visual/spatial, and even musical/rhythmic intelligences, and intrapersonal (metacognition, self-reflection, independent study) and interpersonal intelligences (empathizing, leading, connecting)”(Berk, 2009, p.3).  Berk also examines the way that video can integrate both the left and right brain hemispheres,  “the left side processes the dialogue...the right side processes the visual images, relationships, sound effects” (Berk, 2009, p.3). 

​

Screenshot from “Peer Modelling : Transforming Pedagogy for Emerging Technologies Project”  (Aldred, 2019c)
​

In Enfield’s study of blended learning of multimedia students at CSUN (Enfield, 2013) the author found, not unsurprisingly, that students were less engaged when they couldn’t stream videos easily - “one student suggested YouTube or Vimeo would be appreciated” (Enfield, 2013, p.21)  Just a few years ago, teachers were presenting video via tapes and DVDs, which invariably meant whole class and once only viewings. However, online, on-demand, video revolutionizes the use of video, particularly where students are working independently, on various devices, and any time. It makes a blended classroom a very realistic proposition.  YouTube, at the moment, seems to be the platform of choice for serving this video, both because of its streaming technology, and also general student perceptions. 

These perceptions were explored by Buzzetto-More in a 2014 study of undergraduates.  
In the author’s study a course was designed that featured a heavy use of YouTube videos, and this was given either entirely online, in person, or blended. 

The traditional paradigm of ‘teacher at the whiteboard’, as ‘expert and authoritative narrator’, with students as empty vessels to be filled with content, is clearly untenable, given the research on modelling.  And, where we do see modelling, it is mostly carried out by the ‘expert teacher’.  Peer modelling, where it does occur, tends to arise in a very haphazard manner, and certainly the average classroom is not optimized for this key pedagogical tool.  There are perhaps many reasons for this situation, including very real practical challenges.  In the visual art classroom, students tend to pick up some skills and attitudes from their peers when in a studio type situation; but this is largely determined by chance, given the nature of a particular project and the peers available at any given time.  Also, in terms of the overall ‘learning to be’ an artist, the big picture of developing an artist’s practice, one needs this overview at the beginning of a course of study, and as necessary (‘on demand’) throughout the course. 

​

Screenshot of the YouTube channel “The Art Practice Archive” with the initial diverse experiments in peer modelling videos.

Furthermore, as we have seen from the research, diversity of peer modelling is required in order to engage the students - this means the selection, and often self-selection, and observation of many students over time. So, we have some serious practical challenges to creating a visual art classroom that is optimized for effective peer modelling.  
​
However, technology has now progressed to the point where truly ‘blended classrooms’ are possible.  Simply put, blended learning is a style of learning in which students learn via electronic and online media as well as traditional face-to-face teaching. Researchers have found that student engagement is significantly enhanced by “organic integration ...of online approaches and technologies” (Vaughan, 2014).   
​

Screenshot from “Peer Modelling : Transforming Pedagogy for Emerging Technologies Project”  (Aldred, 2019c)

Naturally, blending with video is particularly powerful in the visual art classroom (and this will be explored further in the ‘Implementation’ section of this paper).

Some research has been done specifically on the effectiveness of blended classrooms in learning aspects of art. Abrahmov and Ronen, for example, wanted to find out how they could create a blended photography classroom (part of a Bachelor of Design degree), so that students could spend sufficient time outside the regular classroom learning how to ‘read’ photographs (visual literacy in terms of the theory of art, and looking at the works of great photographers) and looking at the work of their peers, leaving more time in the regular classroom for the more practical aspects of photography (traditional black and white photography course in a studio and darkroom).  For the online element of this blended classroom, students submitted work that could be viewed online openly by any student, “allowing students to learn from peer examples” (Abrahmov, 2008, p.6).  To complement these online photographs, “a group discussion board was available for continuous peer–peer and teacher–students communication” (Abrahmov, 2008, p.6).  The authors found that the online peer photography assignments provided “useful scaffolding to the students” (Abrahmov, 2008, p.13); they found “60% of students examined their peers' work, before submitting their own, and 50% recorded that they had changed their own work”, after they had seen their the work of their peers.
 
There are also relevant findings in the more radical type of blended model, the ‘flipped classroom’, where students do contextual and preliminary research and receive concept instruction outside the regular classroom, typically as ‘homework’.  For example, in a study of multimedia university students, Enfield found that by creating instructional videos precious teacher time was not spent in repetitive instruction, as students could replay the videos, and students could move through the material at their own pace.  Engagement was helped by connecting the videos with quizzes. 
Enfield also found that “most students (81.1%) stated that they were more likely to watch the videos because there were quizzes” (Enfield, 2013 p.19) 
​

Screenshot of “edpuzzle” quiz used with Landon’s video (Aldred, 2019a)


Similar findings were made in “The flipped classroom: now or never?” (Hawks, 2014). The author provides a good overview of the benefits of a flipped classroom, with its possibilities for videos to be watched asynchronously, outside the traditional class setting, leaving more time and space for synchronous and practical work within the regular classroom.   The author presents evidence from nursing education, in which examination scores were higher in the flipped classroom courses than the traditional courses.  Recommendations for flipped classrooms are made: use the online work to supplement and reinforce the direct classroom work, rather than replace it; use the regular classroom for demonstration, discussion, group work, and individual assistance.  In summary, the author posits that a flipped classroom format supports creativity and encourages students to take more responsibility for their own learning, whilst allowing for teachers to have more time to give personal attention. 

Learning from peer modelling via online resources helps reserve the class-studio for making, and one-to-one teacher-student interaction. In the flipped classroom type of blend, this means more viewing of online material outside regular class-time;  but the blended approach can also mean allowing students to research independently within the regular class-time as required.  For peer modelling of good practice and documentation of research projects, online video is perhaps the most useful, reliable, and universally accessible technology at this time.

​

Screenshot of the peer modelling video, “Jackie: Dreams & Nightmares” (Aldred,2020a)

Another  early and influential advocate of peer modelling was the educational theorist Paulo Freire.   In his seminal work, ‘Pedagogy of the oppressed’, this revolutionary educational theorist could see the problem with traditional modes of education:
​
“Narration (with the teacher as narrator) leads the students to memorize mechanically the narrated content. Worse yet, it turns them into "containers," into "receptacles" to be "filled" by the teacher. The more completely she fills the receptacles, the better a teacher she is. The more meekly the receptacles permit themselves to be filled, the better students they are.”  (Freire, 1970, p.71)
​

Screenshot from “Peer Modelling : Transforming Pedagogy for Emerging Technologies Project”  (Aldred, 2019c)

This is particularly apt in connection with the teaching of visual art.  Learning the practice of art, how ‘to be an artist’,  is not like learning algebra.  It is a mistake to think that we can simply learn some rules and definitions, even some art history, facts, and theory and go away ‘knowing art’.  Art is not simply a matter of downloading content from some great curriculum content creator.   In ‘Pedagogy of the oppressed’, Paulo Freire advocates for the curriculum as space for students to carry out their own inquiries:

“For apart from inquiry, apart from the praxis, individuals cannot be truly human. Knowledge emerges only through invention and re-invention, through the restless, impatient, continuing, hopeful inquiry human beings pursue in the world, with the world, and with each other .“  (Freire, 1970, p.72)

Artists learn through inquiry, and student artists at school are no different.  They make sense of their world through ‘hopeful inquiry’ and they do this ‘with each other’.  A student’s ‘art practice’ is their ‘hopeful inquiry’.  And they model this practice in collaboration with each other.  Paulo Blikstein (Director of Transformative Technologies Lab at Columbia University) analyses the work of Freire, and proposes that Freire’s vision of ‘dialogical education’ can become a reality through the use of technology as an emancipatory tool.  Blikstein argues that computers and ‘digital video’ are “protean machines” that enable diverse and innovative ways of working (Blikstein, 2008, p.2).  Using data from a project in Sao Paulo in 2001, and building on the work of Freire, Papert, and Piaget, he proposes that “construction of knowledge happens remarkably well when students build and publicly share objects” (Blikstein, 2008,p.4)  In this project, where students used computers, videos and arts materials, they found their own themes and created a generative space where the teacher became a facilitator, and a true democratic dialogue between peers and teacher took place. 

 This model of ‘democratic dialogue between peers’ is particularly suitable in the learning of visual art.  The student or emerging artist is no less an artist than their more experienced peers.  At the same time, there is much that can be learnt from the peer artist that has had time to develop their own art practice.  

For the ‘construction of knowledge’ around the development of art practice, it is critical that the artist ‘build and publicly share objects’, as Blikstein notes.  The ‘art exhibition’, hanging work at a gallery, is a very simple example of this sharing. 

However, for a deeper ‘dialogue between peers’, there needs to be a sharing of the process behind the ‘object’ or product of the art making.  As Blikstein found, ‘digital video’ can be that emancipatory technology:

“The Freirean dream can become a reality: the rapid penetration of new technologies in learning environments is an unprecedented opportunity for the dissemination of "Freirean aesthetics" ….Digital technologies offer "protean machines" ...which enable diverse and innovative ways of working, expressing and building. This chameleon adaptability of the computational media promotes epistemological diversity...creating an environment in which students, in their own voice, can concretize their ideas and projects with motivation and commitment...Not only did students become more autonomous and responsible, they learned to teach one another.”  (Blikstein, 2008)

This notion of dialogue with peers is further explored by Johnston et al in “Voices we want to hear and voices we don’t” (Johnston, 1995).  The authors recognise the problem that many students have come to believe that school is simply about knowledge created by authority, a collection of facts to memorize.  These beliefs are then strengthened when all they ever do is work from textbooks, worksheets, and write standardized tests, based on “non-controversial knowledge”.  As Johnston and Nicholls would say, “their voice is not heard”.  

This is a real problem for the emerging-student-artist.  If a student believes that art is simply learnt by memorizing facts or imitating the skills of an authority figure their creativity will be inhibited and they will not come to experience art as individual inquiry, and as a practice of unique and personal  sense making and exploration of their own identity.  Johnston et al propose the solution of “democratic talk”  where there is a space for students to share ideas with their peers in a collaborative spirit.  
​

Screenshot from “Voices we Need to Hear”  (Aldred, 2019d)

This idea of dialogue and collaboration is explored by Sydney Walker, with specific reference to understanding the artmaking process or ‘reflective practice’. In her paper (Walker, 2004), the author analyses a 10 week university art education course and uses evidence from this to argue that student artists learn best when they have a ‘reflective practice’.  Working with Donald Schon’s idea of a “reflective conversation with the materials of a situation” (Walker, 2004, p.2), the author acknowledges that it is difficult when the artist or designers work has the defining characteristics of “an open-ended situation directed by ongoing dialogue” (Walker, 2004, p.2).  The problem is that without knowledge of what this looks like, it is ‘elusive’.  That is why, the “practice of artists...should serve as models for classroom instruction” (Walker, 2004, p.3)  The author quotes Edgar-Heap-of-Birds Hachivi: 

“The first step in teaching is one of informing and inspiring the student with various methods of artistic practice concentrating particularly upon the conceptual themes of artists...This examination of the artists' notions is best done through video-taped artist interviews” (Walker, 2004, p.3) 

It should not be a surprise that the video recording of artists - the documentation of their process, and ‘hearing their voice’ -  is a recurrent theme in the literature of visual art education.  Besides first hand observation and dialogue with an artist over many hours, how else can we truly understand their practice? 

Screenshot from “Voices we Need to Hear”  (Aldred, 2019d)

In this way, the development of video technology can be seen as a revolution in visual art education, or at least it should be.

Walker  goes on to discuss the ‘big ideas’ conceptual approach to art, “elaborated by other elements such as personal connections, knowledge, art making problems, and boundaries” (Walker, 2004, p.3); but, only by observing other artists can “the range of strategies and methods with these different elements” be revealed (Walker, 2004, p.3).  The study suggests that a complement to this modelling of good practice, is the maintenance of “reflective documentation as the process evolves” (Walker, 2004, p.4).   

Psychologists have long observed  that role models are important in developing student creativity.  Sternberg et al, for example, argue that profiles or case studies of creative people “gives students powerful information that exists independently and complements previously stored information” (Sternberg, 1996, p.39) They also observe that “students benefit from seeing the techniques, strategies, and approaches that others use in the creative process” (Sternberg, p.40).   Additionally, they contend that “students absorb the enthusiasm” that creative people “exude as they go about ...making” (Sternberg, p.40).  Another benefit of observing other students at work, and which helps the creative process, is learning to “see the world from a different point of view” (Sternberg, p.41).

In highly structured domains, such as the teaching of algebra, it has been found that ‘expert models are to be preferred over advanced student models’ (Boekhout, 2010).  This could be because in these domains, the ‘worked example’ has a single or best solution.  Or, that the subject area relies heavily on the retention of ‘facts’,  as opposed to exploring different processes.  However, learning to work like an artist is not like learning algebra. The artist’s work is about making sense of the world for themselves, and asking questions to explore; it is not about a consensus of  problems and solutions.  The emerging artist cannot simply find an expert-master-teacher artist, and then simply imitate their thinking, their values, their ‘sense of the world’.  Indeed, it could be argued that an advanced art student is an ‘expert’ of sorts, but not in the sense of ‘master’ of the subject (as in master-apprentice relationship).  Through the course of their practice they have developed a competence in process complementing a special and unique knowledge of sets of interconnected ideas and themes.  Interestingly, in the Boekhout study (Boekhout, 2010), it was not a teacher that was compared with an advanced student model, but a ‘practical expert’ in the subject being taught (in this case, physiotherapy).  I would argue that a student that has carried out an independent art inquiry, and effectively documented it, has a particular area of ‘expertise’. In some ways, each artist is uniquely expert, in terms of creativity and originality. 

Screenshot from “AJ on the making of "Excavations #1 - Niya Okawimawaskiy (I am Mother Earth)”  (Aldred, 2019a)

Braaksma et al (Braaksma, 2002) surveyed the literature on learning environments in which learners learn from models, and found that the effectiveness of ‘observational learning’ (the key learning activity in peer modelling) depended on a number of factors including ‘perceived similarity in competence between model and observer’ (Braaksma, p.405), and the fact that the peer model did not have to be considered a ‘master’ of the subject, but could be ‘coping models’ showing hesitation and ‘errors’.   These are two very important reasons for a diverse archive of peer modelling videos.  This is also supported by social learning theory, and the importance of ‘self-selection’.   Bandura and Walters point out that whether or not “people choose to perform what they have learned observationally is strongly influenced by the consequences of such actions”.  However, social learning theory demonstrates that response to modelling is also regulated by “self-reinforcement” and that the greatest influence is seen “under self-selection conditions”.  (Bandura, 1977,p.10)  “Innovative patterns can emerge solely through modeling” because observers, given the opportunity (e.g. an online on-demand diverse archive of peer modelling videos) select from many sources, and their learning represents  “amalgams of elements from different models” (Bandura, 1977,p.11)  This is supported by Schunk, who hypothesized that:

  “...multiple models presumably increase the probability that observers will perceive themselves as similar in competence to at least one of the models...Especially when subjects doubt their capabilities for learning or performing well, they may discount the successes of a single peer. Observation of diverse instances of peer success may better promote subjects' self-efficacy.” (Schunk, 1987,  p.152)
​
Schunk reviewed 29 studies of peer models and found some evidence that “peer models can enhance children’s self-efficacy for learning cognitive skills better than adult models” (Schunk, 1987, p.153).  Sometimes the artist-teacher model can fail because children “wonder whether they were capable of becoming as competent as the model” (Schunk, 1987, p.153).  There is perhaps a paradox with the situation where, on the one hand, the presence of an ‘expert’, ‘artist-teacher’, in the classroom can engender confidence in students; but, on the other hand, their competence might be interpreted as so far removed from the students experience that they do not find it directly relevant to their situation.  This is not to discount the teachers practice as a model, but to suggest that multiple and diverse models are preferable, particularly where these are perceived as ‘peers’.

Recently there has been some interesting neuroscience research relating to observational learning that might also support the peer modelling approach, and suggest best practice in the production of the videos.  It has been found, for example, that not only can humans encode how a goal is achieved when observing another human, “thereby enabling imitation”, but also they have a role in “understanding action, that is, in inferring of actions” (Van Gog, 2009, p.5) 

Screenshot from “Jackie: Dreams & Nightmares” (Aldred,2020a)
​
This means that a student watching a peer modeling video has the potential to understand the ‘why’ of the artist-students practice.  This is critical for ‘transfer’.  Studies on babies have shown that they can interpret observed action in terms of context and goals, and then achieve similar goals without direct imitation, but through ‘rational imitation’, doing it their own way (Van Gog, 2009, p.5) If the observed actions are accompanied by the observed’s ‘thinking aloud’ (e.g. video narration by the artist-peer), then it is also possible that the mirror neurons are responsible for observational learning of cognitive skills (Van Gog, 2009, p.11) 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
References

Abrahmov, S. L., & Ronen, M. (2008). Double blending: online theory with on-campus practice in photography instruction. Innovations in Education & Teaching International, 45(1), 3–14.  

Aldred, M [Mathew Aldred] (2019a, November 2019 ) AJ on the making of Excavations #1  
  Retrieved from:  https://youtu.be/1mtoYbR6_Bg

Aldred, M [Mathew Aldred] (2019b, December 2019) Landon’s Art Project
Retrieved from:  https://youtu.be/hfRQHht73mc

Aldred, M [Mathew Aldred] (2019c, October 2019) Peer Modelling (Transforming Pedagogy for Emerging Technologies Project)  
Retrieved from: https://youtu.be/-NspjqshESs

Aldred, M [Mathew Aldred] (2019d, July 2019) Voices we need to hear
Retrieved from: https://youtu.be/vTwaFVexodw

Aldred, M [Mathew Aldred] (2019e, June 2019) Making a Blended Visual Art Classroom with YouTube
Retrieved from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xFgiCY0Rg4Q

Aldred, M [Mathew Aldred] (2020a, February 2020 ) Jackie’s “Dreams & Nightmares”
Retrieved from:  https://youtu.be/Tc6Q0v4RETI

Aldred, M (2020b) Transforming Pedagogy with Peer Modeling Videos in a Blended Visual Art Classroom 
Bandura, A., & Walters, R. H. (1977). Social learning theory (Vol. 1). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-hall.  

Berk, Ronald A. (2009). “Multimedia Teaching with Video Clips: TV, Movies, YouTube, and mtvU in the College Classroom.” International Journal of Technology in Teaching and Learning 5 (1): 1–21.   

Blikstein, P. (2008). Travels in Troy with Freire: Technology as an agent of emancipation. In Social Justice Education for Teachers (pp. 205-235). Brill Sense.   

Boekhout, P., van Gog, T., van de Wiel, M. W., Gerards‐Last, D., & Geraets, J. (2010). Example‐based learning: Effects of model expertise in relation to student expertise. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 80(4), 557-566.   

Budge, K. (2016). Learning to be: The modelling of art and design practice in university art and design teaching. International Journal of Art & Design Education, 35(2), 243-258.    

Braaksma, M. A., Rijlaarsdam, G., & Van den Bergh, H. (2002). Observational learning and the effects of model-observer similarity. Journal of educational psychology, 94(2), 405.   

Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed (MB Ramos, Trans.). New York: Continuum, 2007.   

Johnston, P. H., & Nicholls, J. G. (1995). Voices we want to hear and voices we don't. Theory into practice, 34(2), 94-100.   

Schunk, D. H. (1987). Peer models and children’s behavioral change. Review of educational research, 57(2), 149-174.   

Sternberg, R. J., Williams, W. M., & Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. (1996). How to Develop Student Creativity. ASCD.    

Van Gog, T., Paas, F., Marcus, N., Ayres, P., & Sweller, J. (2009). The mirror neuron system and observational learning: Implications for the effectiveness of dynamic visualizations. Educational Psychology Review, 21(1), 21-30.  
​
Walker, S. (2004). Understanding the artmaking process: Reflective practice. Art Education, 57(3), 6-12.   ​