Visual Thinking Strategies (VTS)

I learned about Visual Thinking Strategies in an Art Education class while working on my Masters degree. The conversation based teaching method was designed within the context of art education to encourage students to look at an interpret art for themselves. In a world where we too often rely on museum plaques and internet captions to interpret art for us, the goal is to teach people how to evaluate the art they encounter through the lens of their own life experiences.

Visual Thinking Strategies is an official organization which I am neither affiliated with nor trained by. For the sake of my Sunday School curriculum I will be referring to the VTS Method, not the Organization. The expression of it on this site is based on how it was taught to me in class and modeled to me through videos of trained VTS practitioners.

Even so, the VTS method is both simple and brilliant.

Basics Steps of a VTS Discussion

• Begin by showing a preselected Art image. Give the students an extended period of time to simply look the the piece. Reveal nothing about the piece, no title, no medium, nothing.

• Next, ask the students: “What’s going on in this picture?” Call on students or listen to their comments.

• As they answer, address them by name and restate their observation back to the group. This will allow them to feel heard, ensure you understand them, and ensure that no one misses a comment.

• When students answer, have them justify their observations by asking “What makes you say that?” - Why do you say that’s a grandma? What makes you think ocean?

• After a student has shared and a topic has been explored, continue the discussion by asking “What else can we find?”

• When the conversation has run its course, end the discussion by thanking everyone for participating.

What’s going on in this picture?

Thinking Like a Theologian with VTS

Visual Thinking Strategies allow for unique voices to be heard and new perspectives to be shared. It brings to the front and center details that might be otherwise overlooked, and champions new interpretations of old works. The only wrong answers in VTS are the ones that cannot be justified - you can claim there are velociraptors in the sky if you can explain why that might be the case. Therein lies the ambiguity. Participants don’t get the satisfaction of being correct, just a sense that they are not wrong. Can I remain confident in my perspective even when other people are free to maintain their own? This is the ambiguity of a theologian - the artist meant to paint something, what do you suppose it is? This is different from the postmodern cry that every answer is a right answer (code for none of them are).

VTS also is inherently creative. It is impossible to participate in VTS without presenting something in a new way. Why? In an image, nothing is formulated into words. Even a one word answer like “Ocean.” Contains some creativity because the participant chose to say “ocean” instead of “sea” “lake” or “water.” We ask, “What makes you say Ocean?” because it exposes their creativity. Early on, students may give answers like “because it is an ocean,” or “because it just looks like one.” Take it a step father, “Why do you say it looks like an ocean?” and soon you have answers that are becoming aware of their own creativity. “Because of all the waves” “because there’s no land on the other side” “because there are seagulls in the sky.” Creativity does not mean thinking something that has never been thought of before, but rather, thinking thoughts that were not given to you. There’s always an assumption in a VTS answer, and the second question teases out the significance of this fact. Again, this is the same breed of Creativity used by theologians. Theologians do not make up answers. Rather, they are able to explain and justify their creative thoughts and show that, even though it wasn’t told to them, it is probably true.

Lastly, VTS is only possible because participants come to the discussion with outside knowledge. It works specifically because everyone has different “cross disciplinary research” that is specific to where they’ve been and what they’ve experienced. Teen participants responded differently to a picture of Conquistadores depending on whether or not they had taken Global History yet. Art, science, international travel, Bible knowledge, Greek mythology; whatever background you bring to the table informs how you see a piece. The third question, “what else can we find?” acknowledges that there’s always more to uncover. Of course, this applies to theology too. What we know about the world informs the truth we are able to understand about the God who made it. Because we all have different areas of expertise, we have an opportunity to help those around us see Him differently.