Learning Together: Intergenerational Experiences for Pre-Service Art Educators

Introduction

Studies have shown that ageism is common among college aged students in the United States (Fearnside et al., 2015; Knox et al., 2005; Yilmaz et al., 2012). Changes in attitude towards older adults can be fostered by common interests or experiences. Art making as a shared experience can be key to making connections between generational divides that lead to shifts in attitude and behavior (Fearnside et al., 2015). In Fearnside et al.’s (2015) study, undergraduate students enrolled in a digital photography course at Tiffin University in Ohio were given the assignment to interview residents at local nursing homes and then produce a series of photographs aesthetically representing the conversation. The students in study are not art majors and were taking the course as an elective or to fill a general education requirement including university requirements for community service. Using interview questions pre-determined by the class, students were initially fearful of the interviews, but in the course of conversation were able to find some form of commonality with their elderly partner. The photographic series were produced at the university and shared with the elderly participants at the conclusion of the course. Through analysis of class discussions, the researchers determined trends in comments indicating bias and ageism in the students. In post-project reflections, the researchers noted that students reported empathy for the elderly, surprise at what they learned about their elderly partner in the interview, or a change in the interviewees attitude to the experience once a commonality was discovered.

While we tend to focus on changing attitudes towards the elderly, it is important to recognize that biases come from both parties in an intergenerational program. Angela La Porte (2002) conducted a qualitative research study of an inner-city afterschool program connecting youth ages fourteen to eighteen with elderly persons living in their neighborhood. During a period of twelve weeks the teenagers spent six hours each week visiting a neighborhood partner who was over age 62 and who received Meals-On-Wheels services. The purpose of her study was to “investigate the development of intergenerational relationships that were encouraged through the program’s three components, social service, oral history, and artmaking” (p. 54). La Porte recounts hesitations and skepticism by the elderly participants in the Harlem afterschool programs towards the teens that would be visiting them.