Dr. Richard Lachapelle, PhD

Education

Graduate Certificate in Museum Education

Creative Inquiry: Studio-based Investigation of Singularities in Natural Phenomena

Teaching Philosophy

My understanding of my professional work as an educator has been greatly influenced by the adult education research and teaching of the educational psychologist Gérard Artaud, with whom I worked during the course of my doctoral studies. Artaud (1989) proposes that the adult learner generates a body of personal knowledge based on his or her lived experiences. In addition, this body of experiential knowledge is the necessary complement to the theoretical knowledge that the learner encounters in the classroom. Furthermore, Artaud argues that profound changes in the very structure of personality result from a learning process where experiential and theoretical sources of knowledge come together to generate a new body of integrated knowledge.

Le mot intégration signifie précisément que ce nouveau savoir ne peut prendre forme qu'en s'intégrant à la structure de la personnalité et en la modifiant. Si, en effet, les perceptions que l'individu a de son monde et qui entrent dans la structure de son image de soi sont remaniées, c'est l'image de soi tout entière qui est soumise à un remaniement.(...)  L'apprenant, qui vient ainsi d'acquérir un nouveau regard sur son monde, qui accède à une compréhension plus profonde des phénomènes qui lui étaient demeurés cachés, ne peut plus se situer comme avant: son attitude est changée. Et il y a tout lieu de penser qu'il ne pourra plus se comporter de la même manière. Alors le but de l'apprentissage est atteint : par interaction avec le savoir scientifique, le savoir d'expérience non seulement s'est élargi et consolidé, mais s'est transformé en un nouveau savoir-être, condition indispensable d'un nouveau savoir-faire [Artaud, G.(1989). L'Intervention éducative. Ottawa: Presses de l'Universitéd'Ottawa, p. 141].

I agree with the process of the integration of knowledge described by Artaud. I understand two types of learning -- experiential learning and theoretical learning -- to be the essential components in the student's construction of a professional know-how in art and teaching. Therefore, I encourage and value both types of learning experiences within all facets of my teaching. I believe that this approach is the best way to educate adults. I also believe that this is the best way to train competent, self-motivated art educators capable of engaging in a high degree of professionalism in their practice as educators, following graduation from one of our programs.

This approach to teaching and learning integrates well within the institutional culture that defines the Faculty of Fine Arts. Traditionally, the fine arts disciplines have emphasized practice as a principal means for learning both craft, creative process, and creative thinking. By adding the teaching of theory to the teaching of practice, our students benefit from the advantage of being able to learn from the experience of others, as well as from their own hands-on experience. The ease of integration promoted by this approach provides art education students with a measure of continuity as they negotiate a program of studies that combines both studio and art education courses.

As regards the differences in teaching undergraduate and graduate students, I have come to realize, since my arrival at Concordia, that there exists at least one important difference between undergraduate and graduate students; I now take this distinction into account whenever I am designing a new course. Undergraduate students, it seems, require more structure and guidance in order to learn and perform to the best of their abilities. Graduate students, on the other hand, thrive on a greater degree of autonomy and freedom of action: they tend to exploit a greater amount of latitude as an opportunity to make real and meaningful connections between their own interests and course contents.

Overview of Research Interests

As a scholar and educator for over 40 years and as a faculty member at Concordia University since 1995, I have made a significant contribution to the body of knowledge in the discipline of art and museum education through my research activities in the areas of aesthetic education and museum education. I have published in English, French, andMandarin (in translation). I have published and/or presented research papers inCanada, the United-States, The People's Republic of China, The Netherlands,Italy, Mexico, Austria, and Slovenia. I am the recipient of 4 external research grants (FQRSC, SSHRC, and FCAR) and 3 internal research awards (including a major FRDP grant). I was the editor of the CanadianReview of Art Education, a research journal, from 2007 to 2010 (Volumes 34to 37). My work is often cited by other researchers in the field and my publications are included as required reading in undergraduate and graduate courses in several Canadian universities.

In the next few paragraphs, I summarize my scholarly activities by presenting the major themes under which my research interests and concomitant activities can be grouped. In general, my research focuses on adult learning in the fine art museum; more specifically, my research has attempted to shed light on the skills and knowledge required when adult viewers attempt to interpret and appreciate works of visual art whether in a museum or in another setting.

The Model ofAesthetic Understanding as Informed Experience. In the mid-1990s, I began a multi-year empirical research project aimed at providing evidence to support an hypothetical model first proposed in my doctoral dissertation. The Model of Aesthetic Understanding as Informed Experience sought to identify the types of knowledge implicated in adults' responses to works of art and to explain the dynamic learning process by which adults interpret works of art. This research resulted in the corroboration of the model's trustworthiness as an explanation of the process of adults' responses to works of art and as a prescriptive model for teaching art appreciation. The findings of this work was originally published in 2003; more recently, it has been translated into Mandarin for publication in China (in an abridged version, 2009). One of my key publications on this work is the following.

Lachapelle, R. Murray, D., & S. Neim (2003).Aesthetic Understanding as Informed Experience: The Role of Knowledge in OurArt Viewing Experiences.  Journal of Aesthetic Education, 37(3),78-98.

Comparing experts’ and non-experts’ art viewing experiences. For this body of research, I worked from the assumption that expert viewers—those with professional training in the arts—might be more likely to have developed successful art interpretation skills and strategies than non-experts. Furthermore,I hoped that non-expert viewers might profit from learning the skills and adopting the strategies used by experts. To elucidate these concerns, I conducted empirical research in order to clarify how the art viewing experiences of expert viewers differs from those of non-expert viewers. As an outcome of this research, I have identified differences in terms of the viewing strategies and the types of knowledge that various viewers rely on to inform their art interpretations. In addition, this body of research has produced some interesting and, at times, unexpected results. For example, I have found no evidence to support the notion that non-expert viewers respond to works of art in a more emotional manner (once, a widely accepted idea among museum researchers and educators). In my studies, both experts and non-experts were found to respond to works of art using essentially a cognitive approach. The following is an example of one of my publications related to this research theme.

Lachapelle, R. (2007). Non-Expert Adults’ Art Viewing Experiences: Conjugating Substance with Struggle. In Pat Villeneuve (Ed.),
From Periphery to Center: Art Museum Education in the 21^st Century (pp. 123-128). Reston, VA: USA National Art Education Association.

Controversies about contemporary art and public art. I was a full-time educator at the National Gallery of Canada when a nation-wide controversy erupted regarding the acquisition, for inclusion in the Gallery’s American Art Collection, of Barnett Newman’s large abstract painting Voice of Fire (1967). Ever since, I have found that controversies about art can be a fertile ground for constructing an understanding of the ways in which works of art are perceived and understood(or misunderstood) by various publics. These contentious events also provide insight into the instigating and mediating role played by mass media as the main disseminators of information during such occurrences. An example of my articles on this research theme is as follows.

Lachapelle, R. (2003).Controversies about Public Contemporary Art: An Opportunity for Studying Viewer Responses.  Canadian Review of Art Education, 30 (2), 65-92.

Theoretical aspects of aesthetic experience.While much of my research is based on empirical investigations of adults’ art viewing experiences, at times, I have turned my attention to musing about more theoretical or philosophical concerns. This body of research includes such activities as investigating the fundamental nature of aesthetic experience or exploring related concerns such as the notion of aesthetic development as a paradigm for understanding adult aesthetic behaviour. An examples of my articles on this research theme includes the following publication written from the perspective of material culture studies.

Lachapelle, R. (2011). The Landscape, the Built Environment, and the Work of Art. Three Meaningful Territories for Art Education and Material Culture Studies. In P. Bolin & D. Blandy (eds.), Matter Matters: Art Education and Material Culture Studies (pp. 12-24). Reston, VA: USA National Art Education Association.

Video as a tool for research and education. In my empirical research, I have often used video as the means for recording and storing data. Also, I developed an innovative method for using video cameras in research called “informant-made videography” by which study participants generate research data by producing their own video recordings. Furthermore, for ten years, I taught time-based media courses (film, video, installation and performance art) in our undergraduate programs. These research and teaching activities have led to a body of publications on the theme of video as a research and educational tool. The following is an example of this work.

Lachapelle, R. (1999).  Informant-Made Videos: A Research and Educational Tool.  Studies in Art Education, 40(3), 242-257.

Creative Inquiry: Studio-based Investigation of Singularities in Natural Phenomena. My 2016-17 sabbatical leave is providing an opportunity to engage once again in creative activities in a more intensive and meaningful manner than has been possible in recent years. I am working on several series of works of art that explore, as a guiding overarching principle, the elusive but meaningful character of some every day natural occurrences. Sometimes, as individuals, we can only indirectly experience in the form of singularities certain momentous and awe-inspiring natural phenomena; yet, these marvels of nature often have a weighty influence on our day to day lives, often without our full awareness of their importance. As an example of what I mean, let us consider that the earth's rotation regulates the cycles of day and night and that the inclination of the planet regulates the seasons. With the exception perhaps of a handful of astronauts who have actually visually witnessed these systems in full deployment from vantage points in outer space, most of us simply experience changes in day and night and the seasons as taken-for-granted everyday common events: normally, we are simply not fully aware of the earth's rotation or of the planet's gradually changing inclination. For most of us, this idea of our planet in dynamic motion in space remains largely an abstract concept. Yet, if we pay careful attention to certain types of earth-bound evidence we can indeed experience this phenomenon, albeit indirectly. Through my drawings and photographs, I hope to elucidate and render more evident the aesthetic character of these natural events. 

Research Publications (*peer-reviewed)

*Lachapelle, R. (2016). Reconsidering the Use of Lecturing in Museum Education Practice. In G. Monaco (Ed.), Museum Education and Accessibility: Bridging the Gaps (pp. 170-173). ICOM-CECA: Smithsonian Center for Learning and Digital Access. Available at https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B3x6tIJtXYkyWVRqdTg4d1hZelk.

Lachapelle, R. & Reid, N. (2016). En collaboration avec le GISEMM : Un numéro spécial sur l'éducation et la médiation muséales [Éditorial]. Revue canadienne de recherches et enjeux en éducation artistique, 43(1), 2-3. Available from crae.mcgill.ca.

Reid, N. & Lachapelle, R. (2016). In Cooperation with SIGEMM: A Special Issue on Museum Education and Mediation [Editorial]. Canadian Review of Art Education, 43(1), 3-5. Available from crae.mcgill.ca.

*Lachapelle, R., Keenlyside, E., & Douesnard, M. (2016). Rethinking Docent Training at the Montreal Museum of Fine Arts: A Pilot Study. Canadian Review of Art Education, 43(1), 84-89. Available from crae.mcgill.ca.

*Lachapelle, R. (2016). The Ottawa Roman Catholic Separate School Board's Artists-in-ResidenceProgram (1970-1988): One Point of View. Canadian Review of Art Education, 42(2), 3-17. Available from crae.mcgill.ca.

*Lachapelle, R. & Farley, M. (2016). L'oralité, l'éphémérité et le dialogue. In A. Savoie, A.-M. Émond, F. Gagnon-Bourget &P. Gosselin (éds.), Actes du Colloque sur la recherche en enseignement des arts visuels, Université de Montréal 2014 (pp.48-54). Montréal: CRÉA Éditions, coll. Livres et actes. http://erudit.org/ livre /artsVisuels/2014/index.htm

Lachapelle, R. (2014). The Dialogic Approach in Docent Training. Proceedings of the International Society for Education through Art (InSEA) 2014 World Congress. Available from www.insea.com.

*Lachapelle, R. (2014). « Sphères polaires» et « Crown Fountain » : Un populisme assumé. In A. Savoie, A.-M. Émond, F. Gagnon-Bourget & P. Gosselin (éds.),  Actes du Colloque sur la recherche en enseignement des arts visuels, Université Concordia, Montréal 2012 (pp. 51-56).Montréal: CRÉA Éditions.

*Lachapelle, R. (2013). Controversies about Public Contemporary Art: An Opportunity for Studying Viewer Responses (re-publication with new annotations).  Canadian Review of Art Education, 40, 94-115. 

*Lachapelle, R. (2012). Vues et bévues de l’art public. In A.-M. Émond, A. Savoie, F. Gagnon-Bourget, & P. Gosselin (éds.), Actes du Colloque sur la recherche en enseignement des arts visuels, Université de Montréal, Montréal 2010 (pp. 49-54). Montréal: CRÉA Éditions.

*Lachapelle, R. (2011). The Landscape, the Built Environment, and the Work of Art. Three Meaningful Territories for Art Education and Material Culture Studies. In P.Bolin & D. Blandy (eds.), Matter Matters: Art Education and Material Culture Studies (pp. 12-24). Reston, VA: USA National Art Education Association.

*Lachapelle, R. (2011). ‘Mirroring’ and‘Interactivity’: Two Educationally-Oriented Strategies for Successful Public Art Projects. In Junying, G. & Wang, M. F. (Eds.), Museums for Social Harmony: Public Education and Museums (pp. 54-61). Guangzhou, P. R. China: Jinan University Press.

*Lachapelle, R. (2010). Aesthetics on the run: The public sphere, public art, and art education. In B. White & T. Constatino (eds.), Essays on Aesthetic Education for the 21st Century (pp. 143-162). Rotterdam, Netherlands: Sense Publishers.

*Lachapelle, R. (2010). Fading In: Strategies for Teaching Video Editing. In Mullen, C.& Rahn, J. (eds.), View Finding:Curriculum Perspectives and Practices for Teaching Art and New Media, (pp.83-106).  Netherlands: Springer Publications. 

Lachapelle, R. (2010). Passages [Editorial]. CanadianReview of Art Education, Volume 37, 2010 (pp. xiii-xiv).

*Lachapelle, R., Douesnard, M., & Keenlyside, E. (2009). Investigating Assumptions About the Relationship Between Viewing Duration and Better Art Appreciations. Studies in Art Education, 50(3), 245-256. Reston, VA: USA National Art Education Association.

Lachapelle, R., D. Murray & S. Neim (2009). (Wancen Liu, Trans.). [AestheticUnderstanding as Informed Experience: The role of knowledge in our viewing experiences (abridged)]. China Art Education, 1(1), 4-6. Beijing, People’s Republic of China: PRC Art Education Association.

*Lachapelle, R. (2009). Metaphors as creative thinking in aesthetic interpretation. In Tourisme culturel : Tendances et Stratégies [CD-ROM]. Proceedings of the  ICOM CECA 2008 Conference (InternationalCouncil of Museums, Committee for Education and Cultural Action). Montréal: Pointe-à-Callières, the Montreal Museum of Archaeology and History.

Lachapelle, R. (2009). The Discipline of Art Education [Editorial]. Canadian Review of Art Education, Volume 36, 2009 (pp. xi-xiii).

Lachapelle, R. (2008). The Artist as Educator? [Editorial]. Canadian Review of Art Education, Volume 35, 2008 (pp. xi-xvi).

Lachapelle, R. (2008). Editorial [untitled]. Canadian Review of Art Education, Volume 34, 2007 (pp. ix-x).

*Lachapelle, R. (2008). Le fonctionnement cognitif d’adultes non experts lors de la contemplation d’œuvres publiques d’art contemporain. In P. Gosselin & F. Gagnon-Bourget (éds.), Actes du Colloque sur la recherche en enseignement des arts visuels, Université Concordia, Montréal 2006 (p.47-52). Montréal: CRÉA Éditions.

Lachapelle, R. (2007). L’art contemporain public et le regardeur non expert [on-line].  Available: www.fondationderouin.com.  [Summary of keynote address presented at Forum Art et Public, Symposium international d’art in situ, Fondation Derouin, Val David, Quebec, August 18,2007]. 

*Lachapelle, R. (2007).  Aesthetic dispositions and hypotheses formulation as evaluations of non-expert viewers’ responses to public contemporary art.  In Emma Nardi (Ed.), Pensare, valutare, ri-pensare: Lamediazione culturale nei musei (Thinking, Evaluating, Re-thinking: Cultural Mediation in Museums) (pp. 273-279). Milano, Italy: FrancoAngeli. 

*Lachapelle, R. (2007).  Non-Expert Adults’ Art Viewing Experiences: Conjugating Substance with Struggle. In Pat Villeneuve(Ed.), From Periphery to Center: ArtMuseum Education in the 21^st Century (pp. 123-128). Reston, VA: USA National Art Education Association.

*Lachapelle, R. & Douesnard, M. (2006). Public Contemporary Art and the Non-Expert Viewer.  In P. Gosselin & F. Gagnon-Bourget (Éds.), Actes du Colloque sur la recherche en enseignement des arts visuels, Montréal 2004 (pp. 33-39). Montréal: CRÉA Éditions.

*Lachapelle, R. & Douesnard, M. (2004).  A Study of the Aesthetic Responses of Non-Expert Viewers to Works of Public Contemporary Art. In S.Singer-Sochet, M. Engracia-Vallejo & M. Garduno (Eds.), Proceedings of the 2003 Annual Congress of the Committee for Education and Cultural Action in Oaxaca, Mexico [CD-ROM].  Mexico City: International Council of Museums, Mexican National Committee. 

*Lachapelle, R. & Douesnard, M. (2004).Le regardeur non-initié et l’art contemporain public. Un programme de recherche.  In P. Gosselin & F.Gagnon-Bourget (éds.), Actes du Colloque sur la recherche en enseignement des arts visuels,  Université de Montréal, Montréal 2002 (pp. 41-48). Montréal: CRÉA Éditions.

*Lachapelle, R. (2003). Controversies about Public Contemporary Art: An Opportunity for Studying Viewer Responses.  Canadian Review of Art Education, 30(2), 65-92. 

*Lachapelle, R. Murray, D., & S. Neim (2003). Aesthetic Understanding as Informed Experience: The Role of Knowledge in Our Art Viewing Experiences.  Journal of Aesthetic Education, 37(3), 78-98.

*Lachapelle, R. (2000).Le musée, une ressource pédagogique.  In Gagnon-Bourget, F. & Joyal, F. (Éds), L’enseignement des arts plastiques : recherches, théories et pratiques (pp. 139-148).  London, Ontario : Société canadienne d'éducation par l'art. 

*Lachapelle, R. (2000).  Experiential Learning and DBAE.  In Ralph A. Smith (Ed.), Readings in Discipline-Based Art Education: A Literature of Educational Reform, (pp.125-134).  Reston, Virginia: National Art Education Association. 

*Lachapelle, R. (2000).  La réponse à une œuvre d’art : Le produit de l’expérience ponctuelle conjuguée à un savoir théorique. In F. Gagnon-Bourget & P. Gosselin, Éds., Actes du colloque sur la recherche en enseignement des arts visuels (pp. 39-46).Montréal: CRÉA Éditions. 

*Lachapelle, R. & Murray, D. (1999). Research Using Informant-Made Videos: Two Examples.  In P. Gosselin & F. Gagnon-Bourget (éds.), Actes du Colloque sur la recherche en enseignement des arts visuels. Montréal 1998 (pp. 23-28).Montréal: CRÉA Éditions.

Lachapelle, R.(1999).  Recension de “Les arts plastiques à l'école”.  Canadian Review of Art Education, 26(2), 139-142. 

*Lachapelle, R.(1999).  Educational and Research Applications of Video Technology in Support of Learning in the Museum.  Canadian Review of Art Education, 26(2), 101-113. 

*Lachapelle, R. (1999).  Comparing the Aesthetic Responses of Expert and Non-Expert Viewers. Canadian Review of Art Education, 26(1), 6-21.

*Lachapelle, R.(1999).  Informant-Made Videos: A Research and Educational Tool.  Studies in Art Education, 40(3),242-257.

*Lachapelle, R.(1999).  Similitudes et différences dans les réponses esthétiques des visiteurs experts et non-experts.  In M. Allard & B. Lefebvre (éds.), Le musée au service de la personne (pp.131-142.  Montréal: Université du Québec à Montréal. 

*Dufresne-Tassé, C., N. Banna, M. Sauvé, Y. Lepage, A. Weltzl-Fairchild et R. Lachapelle, (1998). Lefonctionnement imaginaire du visiteur adulte en salle d'exposition : définition, mode d'accès et premières observations. In C. Dufresne-Tassé (éd.), Évaluation et éducation muséale : nouvelles tendances, (pp. 61-76). Québec : Conseil international des musées, Comité pour l'éducation et l'action culturelle. 

*Dufresne-Tassé, C., M. C.O’Neill, R. Lachapelle, A. Weltzl-Fairchild, et N. Banna (1997). Publicité, éducation et fidelité des visiteurs de musées. In AIMAC 1997 Conference Proceedings (pp. 161-168). San Francisco: Association Internationale pour le Management des Arts de de la Culture.

*Lachapelle, R.(1997).  Pointing the Camera the Other Way: What Informant-made Videos Tell Us about the Museum Experience.  In H. Kräutler (Ed.), New Strategies for Communication in Museums, (pp. 83-84).  Vienna: ICOM/CECA Austria.

*Lachapelle, R.(1997).  Experiential Learning and Discipline-Based Art Education. Visual Arts Research. 23 (2), 135-144. 

*Lachapelle, R.(1997).  La compréhension esthétique résultant d'une expérience conjuguée à un savoir. Un programme de recherche.  In F. Gagnon-Bourget & P. Gosselin (Eds.), Actes du colloque sur la recherche en enseignement des arts visuels, Montréal 1996 (pp. 25-29). Sherbrooke : Créa Éditions, Université de Sherbrooke. 

*Lachapelle, R. (1997).  La compréhension esthétique résultant d'une expérience conjuguée à un savoir.  In M. Allard & B. Lefebvre (Eds.), Le musée, un lieu éducatif (pp. 212-223).  Montréal: Musée d'art contemporain de Montréal. 

Lachapelle, R. (1996).  Review of "Apprendre l'image: Recherches et expérimentations en enseignement des arts au Québec". Canadian Review of ArtEducation, 23(1), 68-70. 

*Lachapelle, R. (1994).  La contemplation esthétique : une étude de l’expérience ultérieure au contact avec l’oeuvre.  In B. Lefebvre (Ed.), L'éducation et les musées : visiter, explorer et apprendre (pp. 21-28).  Montreal: Les Éditions Logiques. 

*Lachapelle, R. (1992).  La contemplation de l’oeuvre d’art en tant qu’apprentissage : fondements théoriques et applications pratiques. Canadian Review of Art Education, 19(2), 114-129.

*Lachapelle, R. (1991).  Aesthetic Development Theory and Strategies for Teaching Contemporary Art to Adults.  Canadian Review of Art Education, 18(2), 100-113.

Lachapelle, R.(1981).  “Mais qu’est-ce donc que les arts visuels?” Liaison, n^o17, pp. 14-16. Ottawa : Les Éditions L’Interligne.

Lachapelle, R. (1980).  Au delà du seuil de la résistance.  Liaison, n^o 13, pp. 33-34. Ottawa : Les Éditions L’Interligne.