The imposition of management culture on the academic environment has had a debilitating effect on art education and has caused a complete split between the managers and the managed. Education cannot be easily quantified, but managers only value what can be quantified and thus measured. If an 'output' is not measurable then, it is literally of no account.
Something is systematically wrong with the way that the education of fine artists is managed. In order to get validation small art schools are no longer able to survive on their own and forced into surrendering their autonomy by merging with other institutions, in this case it has resulted in Byam Shaw School of Art joining Central Saint Martins School of Art and Design, part of University of the Arts London. Of which there are many benefits, such as use of the library and the ability to mix with a wider range of disciplines throughout the university. Also services such as student support are much improved. However, with these benefits has also come many disadvantages to the great detriment of the education available at the Byam Shaw.
In the annual report for 2007, UALs expenditure is listed as £161.5 million, yet the payments in 'teaching departments' is at little more than £70.6 million. The money spent on administering the whole bureaucratic nightmare which is University of the Arts London comes directly out of the fees which the students are paying. This money would be far better SPENT ON TEACHING. Effectively, less than half of the fees each student is paying is spent in 'teaching departments'. In the past two years the money allocated to tutorials for the BA Fine Art course at Byam Shaw has been reduced by 276 hours. This has left the part-time staff (who's employment is VERY causalised) finding they have lost a large chunk of income days before the start of the academic year. Tutors are frightened to speak up for fear of reprisal. Here, at Byam Shaw students are taking action, speaking out to fight for the rights which they pay for. It is not a matter of resourcing; it is a matter of priorities. The management culture the university is caught up in has lead to the prioritisation of the administrative over the academic.
Any attempt to query the situation has been met with a rather lame attempt at corporate sophistry.
So what for the future of Byam Shaw? Part of the validation process that is happening throughout University of the Arts London has given Central Saint Martins the opportunity to begin to merge the two BA Fine Art courses. One of the plans on the table currently is the loose the name Byam Shaw BA Fine art and make this course one of the pathways available on the BA Fine Art Central Saint Martins – thus not only loosing its name, but also its individuality. Will it remain as Byam Shaw? I am sure it will be chipped away at bit by bit as the University brings it into line with its 'rationalisation scheme', totally disregarding the idea that each of the schools within the University are individual places which NEED individual budgets to account for this.
Something is systematically wrong with the way that the education of fine artists is managed. In order to get validation small art schools are no longer able to survive on their own and forced into surrendering their autonomy by merging with other institutions, in this case it has resulted in Byam Shaw School of Art joining Central Saint Martins School of Art and Design, part of University of the Arts London. Of which there are many benefits, such as use of the library and the ability to mix with a wider range of disciplines throughout the university. Also services such as student support are much improved. However, with these benefits has also come many disadvantages to the great detriment of the education available at the Byam Shaw.
In the annual report for 2007, UALs expenditure is listed as £161.5 million, yet the payments in 'teaching departments' is at little more than £70.6 million. The money spent on administering the whole bureaucratic nightmare which is University of the Arts London comes directly out of the fees which the students are paying. This money would be far better SPENT ON TEACHING. Effectively, less than half of the fees each student is paying is spent in 'teaching departments'. In the past two years the money allocated to tutorials for the BA Fine Art course at Byam Shaw has been reduced by 276 hours. This has left the part-time staff (who's employment is VERY causalised) finding they have lost a large chunk of income days before the start of the academic year. Tutors are frightened to speak up for fear of reprisal. Here, at Byam Shaw students are taking action, speaking out to fight for the rights which they pay for. It is not a matter of resourcing; it is a matter of priorities. The management culture the university is caught up in has lead to the prioritisation of the administrative over the academic.
Any attempt to query the situation has been met with a rather lame attempt at corporate sophistry.
So what for the future of Byam Shaw? Part of the validation process that is happening throughout University of the Arts London has given Central Saint Martins the opportunity to begin to merge the two BA Fine Art courses. One of the plans on the table currently is the loose the name Byam Shaw BA Fine art and make this course one of the pathways available on the BA Fine Art Central Saint Martins – thus not only loosing its name, but also its individuality. Will it remain as Byam Shaw? I am sure it will be chipped away at bit by bit as the University brings it into line with its 'rationalisation scheme', totally disregarding the idea that each of the schools within the University are individual places which NEED individual budgets to account for this.
Perhaps they need a Policy Adviser?????
ReplyDeleteBut no amount of teaching will turn someone with little or no talent into a good artist - it is a talent and cannot be learnt without talent.
ReplyDeleteThen to be financially self-supporting from being an artist you need to be super-talented, able to shock or commercially minded with a commercial style of art.Or if you're not too good at any of these I suppose you teach?
And what does the teaching teach you? To constrain yourself within the bounds of the teaching? To spout a load of long words and twaddle which you yourself dont really understand - let alone anyone else?
I presume you mean there is something "systemically" wrong with the management rather than systematically - those big words are so hard arent they to get right?!?lol