Below is an email conversation between a reader, Lynn, and I:
Hi Liz,
I stumbled upon your blog as I’m debating whether to go back to school for art therapy. I basically have a week or so to put my application together in order to have a shot of starting grad school again this fall.
I have a masters in art education, and I’ve been teaching art in the south Bronx in New York for almost two year. Working with the kids in the Bronx made me realize art education isn’t enough for some of these children. Many kids come from unstructured and broken families which caused a lot of behavioral problems. Some of their behaviors are so disruptive to the point that I can’t teach on a regular basis. After almost two years of teaching, I’ve finally became okay with those disruptive kids who are not able to meet the objective of the lesson; as long as they aren’t being unsafe or disruptive, that’s all the matters to me right now. However, at the same time, part of me feel guilty for not being able to provide those kids art because of their difficult behaviors as they are probably the ones who need art the most of all. It made me wonder how would it be like to provide art therapy for these children, and what it would be like to combine art education and art therapy together in the classroom. I’m not sure if anyone has done things like this before, and I’m just wondering what your thoughts are. I just want to be sure this is something that I’m interested enough in to invest another two years in school. A friend of mine mentioned that some people who work as an art therapist get warped up emotionally which could make their job seem depressing as they are emotionally affected. I just wonder if I have what it takes to work in art therapy.
Any thought and suggestion you may have, I would much appreciate it. Thanks Liz! Hope to hear from you soon.
Best,
Lynn
Hey Lynn,
Your question is a really good one.
I think being an art therapist in a school setting (and there are lots of school art therapists out there!) won’t be that much different from what you’re already doing, except that you’ll be coming from a different perspective. In other words, your primary responsibility will be therapeutic services and case management, rather than teaching. You won’t be seeing as much of the “normal” or “well adjusted” kids that you currently work with. As a school art therapist you’d primarily be working with the disruptive ones (which is why they’ll be referred to you in the first place).
That being said, I used to work with kids in a community mental health center, all of whom had behavioral problems in schools, but somehow most of them didn’t exhibit those behaviors during 1:1 therapy sessions or groups sessions. For the most part, they were redirectable and respectful. I think maybe that had to do with the nature of art therapy—you’re not trying to “teach” anything in particular. No curriculum. Rather, you’re allowing the client to explore the materials, while offering a contained environment and unconditional positive regard. For example, if you know the kid you’re working with gets easily frustrated and then angry, you wouldn’t work with something that takes lots of patience to learn and execute. You would stick to markers and colored pencils, and make sure whatever the client was doing, he’d be successful. When children are given the opportunity to do what they want artistically to express themselves, while at the same time feeling supported by the therapist, wonderful things can happen. Perhaps some of the behavior difference also had to do with the client/staff ratio. It’s also much easier for a child to feel supported when they’re alone with the therapist, or with 5-10 kids, in a group setting. As you know all too well, class sizes are at least double that, and kids that are needy, easily stimulated or socially fragile have great difficulty in that kind of environment.
On the other hand, something that is often frustrating for therapists is that the kids they work with go home to chaotic environments. It can feel like all the emotional and social learning that took place during therapy gets undone at the end of the day. This is something that all therapists who work with kids in an outpatient (or school environment) have to come to terms with, and tends to be a hot topic in supervision, where the art therapy intern (or post-grad) talks with a more senior therapist for advice. Lots of times school therapists also meet with the families, and my provide family therapy with the child present. That can be a difficult experience too because you’re meeting the disfunction head on. Some families may not be interested in changing what’s going on in the home. Also, it’s certainly true that therapists can take on emotional residue from what goes on in session. Self-care, supervision, art-making and your own therapy can help to let go of difficult emotions transferred to you during the day.
So…I guess my point is that being a therapist is an emotionally demanding job. Just like teachers, therapists tend to have high burn-out rates. The fact that you have your eyes open because you already work in a helping profession is good because you understand firsthand how difficult front-line work can be. Everyone comes to terms with these realities in their own way, and usually the thing that gets us through is seeing the good part of our jobs—when a client does connect with you, grow, and learn something about themselves and the world. Thankfully, the amazing part of working with kids is that they are programmed to grow and learn innately. It’s more likely to see that kind of good stuff (on a continuous basis) with kids than it is with other (adult) populations.
I hope this helps Lynn! Good luck in your decision making :) You can always apply and think about it some more while you wait for the acceptance letter.
Regards,
– Liz
Hi Liz,
Thank you so much for your speedy response! Just few more questions…
How long have you been an art therapist? Do you see yourself continuing working in the art therapy field for a while?
I understand that some schools takes more psycho dynamic approaches to therapy and some places more emphasis on humanistic approaches. What are the differences?
Best,
Lynn
Hey Lynn,
I’ve been an art therapist for 3 years, but if you include my internships, it’s more like 5.
I really love what I do! But, just like being a teacher, there’s the sense that you work really hard for not that much pay….although, going into private practice can be a lucrative venture (if you set it up right). Same with being a health care administrator. But, those are things that are way down the road for me.
I hesitate to answer the question regarding whether I see myself long-term in the art therapy field, because I’m in the process of rethinking my goals…and much of that has to do with the ridiculous bureaucracy in California when it comes to state licensure. California is in the process of making a new license for Professional Counselors, which is usually the license art therapists practice under. CA was the last state to make this law, and they’re making it extremely difficult for people who already hold an out of state masters degree to obtain the license (I got my degree in Philadlephia). So…I’m worried that I may not get a license here, and will need to move to another state if I want to continue practicing art therapy. This is not something that you would have to contend with in NY, because there is a specific license for art therapists in your state, although I’m not up-to-date on all the schtick about art therapy and NY state. I suggest contacting an art therapist in NY to see what the bureaucratic pitfalls are.
So…when it comes to psychodynamic vs. humanistic approaches, below is my opinion:
Art therapy was founded in the principals of psychodynamic theory by Margaret Naumburg, who called what she was doing Art Psychotherapy. Around the same time, however, Edith Kramer founded a more humanistic/person centered approach to art therapy, Art as Therapy. So, the practice of art therapy is on a spectrum between Art Psychotherapy and Art as Therapy. There is a time and place for both, and therefore it’s important to have experience with both.
For me (and I suspect for you as well, since you’re already an art teacher), Art as Therapy came natural to me. It’s based on the principal that making art and being supported by an attuned art therapist will, by nature, facilitate self expression and healing. The psychodynamic part, however, requires lots of reading, training and practice before mastering (and it does take a lifetime to master). That’s not to say that one doesn’t need practice at staying attuned to our clients, because that also takes a lifetime to master. But, for me, I cannot imagine being an art therapist without the rigorous training on the psychotherapeutic aspects of the human psyche.
The school I went to (Drexel) was very psychodynamically oriented, and this annoyed many of the people in my cohort. However, by the second year, other ways of approaching clients were discussed, including humanistic. And I don’t see why someone can’t come from a place of understanding art therapy from a psychodynamic perspective, while at the same time being client centered—giving the clients unconditional positive regard and meeting them where they’re at. In fact, at Drexel “meeting the client where they’re at” was a mantra in our courses. In other words, being in a psychodynamically oriented program doesn’t mean that they train you to put the client on the couch and say nothing during sessions. Also, the more learning you do about other philosophies and ways of practicing therapy, the more you can integrate these ideas into your practice. Most students don’t have a clear idea of what philosophies resonate most with them until they’re at the end of their studies/internships, and this continues to develop once you’re a practicing professional.
I encourage you to visit the schools you’re thinking of attending—meet the director of the program, talk to students, see what the classes are like. This will help narrow down what school works best for you.
Regards,
– Liz