29 SES 12, Arts, creativity and cultural education
In the fast changing world young people are involved in various activities, they are attracted by the digital world and modern technologies. At the same time (i)migration of people is more and more intensive, and globalization is increasing. A lot of young people are involved in different exchange programs, non-formal activities and have possibilities to explore cultures and national peculiarities of other nations. The usual, well-established stream of life, enriched by slow, but deep communication, traditional customs and usual forms of art, are not so much relevant any more. In the face of these changes a two-way issue arises: how to maintain cultural heritage and how to enrich modern art activities by adopting traditions, customs and ethno-cultural experiences?
The future of education is connected with non-formal education. This form of education is very significant in the European Union. Non-formal art activities do not have to meet strict requirements and it is the space, where young people are free to express themselves almost without any limitations, because of absence of a formal education program. This space creates good conditions to understand the real needs of young people. “Also in the context of culture and art education, it is precisely the non-formal education programmes that can serve as means of bridging the gap between the separate spheres of education and arts and culture” (Bosić, Golob Mihić ,2017, p. 224).
The concept of cultural heritage covers many areas of life and is closely related to historical memory. However, almost every day the question arises among young people in particular if it is really important to foster the traditions, ethno-cultural education of the nation and to distinguish heritage and memory. It becomes exceptionally relevant at the moment, when many people, no matter what nation they represent, are increasingly feeling the citizens of Europe or even of the whole world.
The understanding of culture, traditions (whole heritage) as well as art education in this context has to be of in-depth character. The young generation have to be willing and able not only to adopt cultural heritage but also to assume its in-depth meaning and content to make it an integral part of their identity, to adapt it to their current needs. Experiencing art works, the cultural approach, and artistic practice all feed into one another. “A direct relationship with works of art <…> and the aesthetic experience which results from it are not passive attitudes but must be understood as active processes involving both cognitive and emotional responses (European Agenda for Culture, 2010, p. 13). Cultural heritage becomes closely linked to art activities and these are the links that become a facilitating instrument, which allows to take over the experience encoded in fine arts, music and dance, to transform and to integrate it into contemporary art activities.
The analysis of certain aspects of the interaction between heritage and modern art activities predetermines the aim of the research: to reveal the approach of young people involved in the art activities towards the aesthetic, ethical and moral problems arising in the interaction of cultural heritage and their art activities. The context of this problem exposes the questions for the research: how do young people understand the concept of heritage; are they prepared for the integration of cultural heritage in their artistic activities; what factors lead young people to participate in the activities connected with ethno-culture and folk art?
The theoretical analysis involved the examination of the scientific literature and documents. The empirical research was carried out using questionnaires and interviews. Qualitative research was conducted in 2015-2018. Sample: The questionnaire survey was performed in higher education schools in Lithuania, Latvia, Poland and Ukraine in the processes of non-formal activities (clubs for fine art activities, musical ethno-cultural ensembles). The nationality of the participants was different: Lithuanian, Chinese, Latvian, Polish, Russian, Spanish, Turkish, and Ukrainian. A united European space dictated the desire not to restrict the research to the location of one nation. The participants for the research were chosen on the basis of purposeful sampling. The following criteria were applied selecting young people for the research: a) students of higher education schools; b) participants in some activities of non-formal education connected with art; c) up to 25 years of age. The criteria were important in order to reveal young people‘s (who are related to art) approach to heritage and art activities. The total sample consisted of 97 informants. Methods: The qualitative content analysis was applied processing the accumulated data, which was based on data preparation, multiple reading of the transcribed text, a detailed rendering of information – distinguishing of categories and subcategories, and their interpretation. The aim was to identify important categories within a body of content, and to provide a description of the reality created by those categories as they are lived out in a particular setting (Creswell, 2013; Bitinas, Rupšienė, Žydžiūnaitė, 2008). Tool: The questioning survey (using open-ended questions) was presented in the Lithuanian, Latvian, Polish, Ukrainian and English languages and employed to collect data. The data obtained during the interviews were also used; the informants were interviewed by the researchers. Ethics: The research was conducted considering principles of research ethics: voluntary participation, informed consent, confidentiality, anonymity and respect the privacy of participants (Creswell, 2013; Kardelis, 2016). The permission to use the responses to the questions for research purpose was received from all the participants.
The results of the research revealed that participants of the research understand the concept of cultural heritage very differently, i.e. they link it with the concept of time, different kinds of heritage, as also connect with the national identity and world culture. The participants highlighted the importance of integration of heritage in personal art activities. They expressed the respect for heritage and preserved ethical behavior with it. Some participants underlined the need of modern way of integration of heritage, i.e. its transformation, sometimes even stylization, because heritage should live together with people and for people, not for its own sake. Young people stressed the factors, which influence their motivation of participation in the ethno-cultural activities: possibilities of experiencing positive feelings, expanding social links, expressing themselves in the variety of activities and growing as a personality. These factors were relevant for the participants involved in musical ethno-cultural activities. Young people from fine arts clubs underlined other factors. They revealed the importance of possibilities of seeking for the higher meaning in life and possibilities to acquire spiritual basis, (besides possibilities of experiencing positive feelings and to grow as a personality). Despite the fact that almost all the factors had strong link with the basic human needs, at the same time many statements were connected with art activities and heritage.
Used in the abstract: Bosić N., Golob Mihić I. (2017). Cultural and Arts Education – Project Benčić Youth Council. Ge-conservación, Vol. 11. ISSN: 1989-8568, p. 224-229. https://dialnet.unirioja.es/descarga/articulo/6053520.pdf visited on January 11, 2019 Bitinas B., Rupšienė L., Žydžiūnaitė V. (2008). Kokybinių tyrimų metodologija [Methodology of qualitative research]. Klaipėda: S. Jokužio leidykla-spaustuvė. Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. London: Sage publications. European Agenda for Culture (2010). (Ed. Lauret J.-M., Marie F.). http://kultura.kreativeuropa.hu/letolt/KrEu/OMC/Synergies_between_culture_and_education_FULL.pdf visited on October 10, 2018. Kardelis K. (2016). Mokslinių tyrimų metodologija ir metodai [Research methodology and methods]. Vilnius: Mokslo ir enciklopedijų leidybos centras. Used in all research: Jucevičiūtė-Bartkevičienė, V., Palubinskienė, V., Tavoras, V. (2017). Jaunimo etnokultūrinis ugdymas aukštųjų mokyklų muzikiniuose ansambliuose [Ethnocultural Youth Education in Musical Ensembles of Higher Schools]. Acta Paedagogica Vilnensia: mokslo darbai. Vilnius: Vilniaus universiteto leidykla, Vol. 38., ISSN: 1392-5016, p. 112-125. Jucevičiūtė-Bartkevičienė, V., Palubinskienė, V., (2016). Neformalusis jaunimo etnokultūrinis muzikinis ugdymas: Lenkijos patirtis [Young people’s non-formal ethnocultural music education: the polish experience]. Švietimas: politika, vadyba, kokybė = Education: policy, management and quality = Образование: политика, менеджмент, качество. No. 2 (16). ISSN 2029-1 p. 55-65. Managing cultural world heritage (2013). Paris: United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. http://whc.unesco.org/en/news/1078 visited on October 9, 2018. Pathways 2.0 towards recognition of non-formal learning/education and of youth work in Europe (2011). European Commission and the Council of Europe. http://pjp-eu.coe.int/documents/1017981/3084932/Pathways_II_towards_recognition_of_non-formal_learning_Jan_2011.pdf/6af26afb-daff-4543-9253-da26460f8908 visited on September 5, 2018. Rethinking Education: Investing in skills for better socio-economic outcomes. (2012). http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/FR/TXT/?qid=1423750986387&uri=CELEX%3A52012DC0669 visited on July 27, 2018. Silina-Jasjukeviča G., Briška I. (2016). In-depth Cultural Studies in Multicultural Group. Discourse and Communication for Sustainable Education, Vol. 7 (1), pp.139-148. Solewski R. (2017). A Heritage and an Artwork. As a Response and as a Gift. Heritage and Response in Contemporary Art. Abstracts of Speeches. Heritage and response in contemporary art: international artistic-scientific conference: [2017.10.25–26, Kraków, Polska]. Kraków: Muzeum Narodowe w Krakowie: Wydział Sztuki Uniwersytetu Pedagogicznego w Krakowie, pp. 13-14.
00. Central Events (Keynotes, EERA-Panel, EERJ Round Table, Invited Sessions)
Network 1. Continuing Professional Development: Learning for Individuals, Leaders, and Organisations
Network 2. Vocational Education and Training (VETNET)
Network 3. Curriculum Innovation
Network 4. Inclusive Education
Network 5. Children and Youth at Risk and Urban Education
Network 6. Open Learning: Media, Environments and Cultures
Network 7. Social Justice and Intercultural Education
Network 8. Research on Health Education
Network 9. Assessment, Evaluation, Testing and Measurement
Network 10. Teacher Education Research
Network 11. Educational Effectiveness and Quality Assurance
Network 12. LISnet - Library and Information Science Network
Network 13. Philosophy of Education
Network 14. Communities, Families and Schooling in Educational Research
Network 15. Research Partnerships in Education
Network 16. ICT in Education and Training
Network 17. Histories of Education
Network 18. Research in Sport Pedagogy
Network 19. Ethnography
Network 20. Research in Innovative Intercultural Learning Environments
Network 22. Research in Higher Education
Network 23. Policy Studies and Politics of Education
Network 24. Mathematics Education Research
Network 25. Research on Children's Rights in Education
Network 26. Educational Leadership
Network 27. Didactics – Learning and Teaching
The programme is updated regularly (each day in the morning)
- Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
- Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
- Search for authors and in the respective field.
- For planning your conference attendance you may want to use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference
- If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.