If you search for "art schools are disappearing" online, you will likely find numerous articles, reports, and essays. Some express anxiety, others frustration, and a few provide a measured analysis of the issues driving this crisis. A recurring concern is that art and design institutes increasingly function as academic centres rather than as spaces for hands-on practice. Instead of focusing on media and material exploration, art and design are often taught primarily as theoretical or textual subjects.
Over the years, I observed several leading art and design institutes in India hosting prominent scholars from European and American academia to advise Indian faculty on curriculum design. Ironically, similar approaches have contributed to the decline or closure of many art and design institutions in the West over the past 20 to 30 years. While one does not wish to overly criticise these influential figures or their contributions, as they failed to address the decline of art and design institutes in the West, it is crucial to reassess whether their academic approach suits the emerging Indian art and design education.
To start, let's clarify the difference between academia and teaching in the educational realm.
Academia in education: Academia focuses on advancing knowledge through research, scholarship, and critical inquiry. Academics contribute new theories, insights, and discoveries to their fields, often through journal publications, conference presentations, and books. Research is the primary emphasis, particularly within universities and research institutions, where academics are required to publish regularly, attend conferences, and secure research funding.
Academic evaluations largely depend on research output, citation impact, and contributions to the field. While teaching is a component of their roles, research accomplishments typically carry greater weight. The intended audience for academic work is primarily other scholars, specialists, and professionals aiming to push the boundaries of a specific discipline. Academics usually work in universities, research institutions, or think tanks, balancing teaching responsibilities with research duties. Professional growth is driven by publications, research grants, and tenure, with ongoing learning achieved through specialisation, conferences, and continued research.
Teaching in education: In contrast, teaching centres on knowledge transmission and student learning and Teachers focus on helping students understand concepts, develop skills, and cultivate curiosity. Research is minimal, emphasising direct instruction and classroom management rather than research or publication.
Teacher evaluations are based on their ability to engage students, promote learning, and achieve measurable outcomes. Success is often gauged through student performance, classroom observations, and feedback from students and parents. Teachers typically need metonymy in curriculum design and methods, especially in standardised systems, as they follow structured lesson plans and timetables. With limited time for research, teacher growth focuses on pedagogy, classroom management, and educational tools, often achieved through workshops, training sessions, and certifications designed to enhance teaching skills.
In summary, academia and teaching serve distinct but equally important roles, each requiring unique approaches and skill sets, especially within art and design education.
The Confused State of Indian Art and Design Institutes:
Closely examining curriculum design in Indian art and design institutes reveals significant confusion. Some institutes have taught art and design since independence, whereas others have emerged more recently.
This confusion can be categorised into two main areas:
1. The distinction between undergraduate and graduate programs.
2. The difference between academia and media-material teaching.
As mentioned, academia primarily focuses on research, targeting scholars rather than clients or viewers. Just so you know – the benchmarks for accomplishments in this context are defined accordingly. In other words, an academic program—whether in art, design, or other humanities—centres on text-based knowledge production rather than material exploration and expression.
If art and design institutes fail to differentiate clearly between academically focused and media/materially focused tracks in their graduate and undergraduate programs, they risk leaving students frustrated. Those interested in academic study or hands-on media practice may engage in areas that need to align with their goals or passions. Historically, art and design education has succeeded in nurturing students capable of excelling in either field, yet current practices often need to be revised between student interests and program offerings.
My experience with graduating students from various institutes shows that many need more confidence upon completing their programs. This is mainly due to the institutional confusion between academic and media/material approaches. Today, many students graduate with a strong focus on theoretical knowledge rather than practical skills, often landing in a nebulous position—not fully academic scholars but not entirely media/material practitioners either. Given the significant financial investment required for art and design education, it won't be long before Indian students and parents seek more practical career paths, wary of the disillusionment that follows years spent in an unfocused Art and Design programs.
The second area of confusion involves the distinction between graduate and undergraduate programs. Many art and design institutes in India offer postgraduate programs as alternative tracks for students wishing to diverge from their undergraduate specialisations or provide a condensed two-year version of what would typically be a four-year curriculum. Those familiar with art and design education recognise that neither approach effectively fosters academic or media/material practice. Ideally, postgraduate programs should be structured as academic pursuits that enable students to generate knowledge through their practices.
These two areas of confusion pose severe challenges to art and design institutes worldwide. Many European and American institutions are looking to Indian and Chinese students for their survival despite maintaining a fee structure that racially discriminates against Asian and African students.
Increasing studies from Europe and the U.S. have highlighted the shortcomings of an exclusively academic model in undergraduate and postgraduate programs. This has led to widespread student disillusionment with art and design education, resulting in a shift away from these fields in favour of disciplines like engineering. A critical evaluation of this situation is necessary. Adopting these approaches, which have contributed to the decline of numerous art and design institutes in the West, as a model for programs in Asia and Africa requires careful reconsideration.
Lastly, a post-colonial approach is becoming essential in India's art and design education today. Numerous studies indicate that we must avoid reinforcing a colonial mindset that perpetuates racial discrimination embedded in globalisation. Instead, we should empower the next generation of art and design students and practitioners with a more inclusive and critical perspective that addresses our regional needs and requirements.
No comments:
Post a Comment