Vince Pitelka on tue 6 jun 06
Dear Tony -
I appreciate your long and well-reasoned defense of online and distance
degree programs, and your reasons for choosing that avenue towards an MFA.
I never said that online or distance classes were inherently ineffective. I
said that an online or distance MFA program could, at best, offer only a
watered-down version of an on-site residency MFA program. I stand by that.
In your case, I don't think it really matters. With all the experience you
have, and all the graduate credits you have already taken, I don't think it
is going to much of a difference whether you pursue your MFA on-site at a
bricks-and-mortar institution. Either way, you are a committed and able
teacher, and if you complete your MFA via a distance graduate program, I
expect that you will be better qualified than 90% of the people who complete
their programs in residency.
I can't really compare my situation to yours, because my wife and I only
have one child, but we were both in grad school simultaneously, getting by
with tuition wavers, small stipends, and student loans. We made it work,
and the considedrable student loan debt we accumulated was a very small
price to pay for what we got out of it.
I commend you for developing the online art appreciation course. I think
that art appreciation and art history courses can be taught very effectively
online. We have talked before about online studio art courses, and you
already know what I think about that. I don't think they are or ever well
be an effective way to teach studio art. Don't assume that this is a
"cavalier" attitude as you imply. I have talked to studio art faculty all
over the country about this, and we feel that online teaching of studio art
is just one of many things threatening the quality and effectiveness of
studio art instruction in academia today. Of course a student should do
whatever they can to accommodate the needs of their students, but not to an
extent where the quality and effectiveness of the education is severely
compromised.
No one has ever asked me to teach an online or distance course. There is
nothing personally defensive in my attitude here, because there would be no
reason for me to be defensive. But I am committed to defending the quality
of art studio instruction in academia, and I do see the move towards
distance or online teaching of studio art as a serious threat.
Tony, some of the response I have recieved in this thread is very worrisome,
including many of your comments. The implication that I would express such
strong and emotional opinions "from a vacuum" is a bit insulting. I think
you know me better than that. And your characterization of "an
overabundance of animosity towards this subject" is a bit odd. It seems
like animosity to you, because you are convinced that distance and online
education in the studio arts are okay. I am convinced that the whole
concept ofonline and distance education in studio art is inherently
defective, and as a professional academic with strong feelings about the
teaching of studio art, I feel compelled to speak out about this. Is it
fair to characterize that as "an overabundance of animosity?"
I do regret the "lame-ass" reference. That was careless of me. But I stand
by my convictions on this. For anyone who has not done previous graduate
work and accumulated the experience you have, but wants to get the MFA in
order to teach, doing it via a distance education program would rob them of
so much of the richness and experience that an MFA can offer, and much of
the experience that could make them a good teacher. Linda Arbuckle
explained that very well in a recent post. Getting an MFA with the intent
of becoming a teacher is all about immersing oneself in the opportunities
that grad school offers, and there is no way that a student could even begin
to take advantage of those opportunities without being there onsite.
There are all sorts of opportunities that are available in life only by
making the necessary commitment and sacrifices. Getting an MFA or PhD fits
into this category. These things simply are not available to those who
cannot make the commitment and sacrifices, nor should they be. The people
who really want a terminal degree will always figure out a way to make it
work.
You said "I have always felt the individual was the person most responsible
for his or her "degree" of learning anyway." That's always true in
college - the successful student must be very proactive and involved,
aggressively seeking opportunity and experience, So, if the person is going
to go for an MFA, shouldn't they have just as much exposure to opportunity
and experience as everyone else? Why would anyone want to go for a terminal
degree and them purposefully put themselves in a position where they will be
"left out" of so much of the important substance of the degree program? It
makes no sense at all.
You said "The age of the traditional student is gone." Tony, in art there's
no such thing as "the traditional student" and there never has been. The
nature of students and the theories of education are always evolving, and
the teacher must respond in kind. But that should never entail sacrificing
the quality and effectiveness of education. As I said in an earlier
message, technological advancement qualifies as progress only if it really
represents a move forwards beyond previously available methods. Online
studio art instruction does not fit that category. Adjusting education in
order to "get up to speed with the demographics of who is out there and
their needs" makes sense only if the quality of education can be maintained.
We cannot respond to a "stated need" to make education or more convenient
and accessible if it also means a deterioration in the quality.
My advice to you is to go ahead and get that MFA by whatever means you can
if it will bring you more teaching opportunities. A person with your
experience, passion, and commitment should be teaching.
- Vince
Vince Pitelka
Appalachian Center for Craft, Tennessee Technological University
Smithville TN 37166, 615/597-6801 x111
vpitelka@dtccom.net, wpitelka@tntech.edu
http://iweb.tntech.edu/wpitelka/
http://www.tntech.edu/craftcenter/
Tony Ferguson on tue 6 jun 06
Vince,
I've been reading other's response to my question with interest. So, I will try to not reiterate what many have said. I am pleased with the amount of discussion you have generated Vince. Well done.
Anyway, I believe in this instance you may be speaking from a vacuum. Have you ever developed a curriculum for and also taught an online course? How about a distance course? Have you taught one of these? You must know, a distance course traditionally is very different than an online course or program for that matter. You may actually consider looking at curriculum and see what is required before you make any further judgments or defense of your ideal educational experience.
Vince, you also seem to group all online Art courses into one no way "lame ass" category. I get the sense that in your neck of the woods online or distance is being breathed down your neck maybe as I seem to feel an overabundance of animosity over this subject from you? What gives brother?
Well, that said, I will agree with part of what you say: not all Art courses should be taught online--but as a response to that I would say one could do a hybrid form where part is taught online and part is taught in the classroom. Have kiln will travel.
Much of the initiative to get courses online is a response to the needs of the ever changing student base--not a "lame ass" way to sell a degree to "easy paper seeking people." And why would a teacher not try to accommodate the needs of their students? It's a changing world and change does not mean inadequate education--that has to do with the instructor. I have always felt the individual was the person most responsible for his or her "degree" of learning anyway.
The age of the traditional student is gone. It is time to get up to speed with the demographics of who is out there and their needs. They are the paying customer if I recall. It's sort of like people with 80's thinking who still think $10 an hour is a lot of money. There is simply no such thing as a traditional "traditional" student anymore. If anyone is hanging on to this, let it go. This is 2006--people have families, work multiple jobs, etc, etc. Higher Ed. is namely for middle classes and up and those they are willing to give loans to (like myself so we can pay on them the rest of our lives). Blue collar people with families can not just take 3 years off--at least most. Shall I increase my debt from $52,000 to (3 years of MFA) to over $100,000 probably more? Like Clennel, if someone would be my patron then I suppose it could be a reality for us assuming I could receive such a gift. Taking three years off and going into debt well that just pushes our ability to buy a
house till--well, maybe never on a potter's/teacher's income? The sad hard reality of our educational system is that it is shrinking, becoming more marginalized because of economics. I am quite happy to teach my way through and even then assistantships have become a mere pittance if you can get them. How do I support my family of 6 on a $4500 assistantship for the entire year? I have been told that its heavily frowned upon to do my work or work a job outside of grad school. I wonder if the programs I've applied to and being rejected has to do with my experience and or 4 children and wife? You see, they, or most from what I can tell, are all geared to the single student expected to live a lifestyle quite different than a man with responsibilities to a family. So, right now, an online MFA from a reputable program is looking about the only feasible thing for us. And even then, they charge more then a bricks and mortar which I am trying to understand why it costs more?????
I'm getting sort of off topic here. Back to online:
I have developed curriculum and taught online an Introduction to Art / Art Appreciation course which included taking students from Pre-historic to Post-Modern with a variety of studio lessons I developed based on my research, textbooks, my own experiences and what I thought students would be motivated to learn about and was interesting. I was asked to develop and teach this course and even with my computer and art background, I thought to myself "Can this be done well?"-- so the student experience is valid and as good or better than if I taught this face to face? I feel a strong sense of responsibility to my student's learning as I see my interaction with people very significant beyond the usual exchange--perhaps spiritual or karmic responsibility would suit. I take what I do very seriously. So Vince, should a single mom with 3 kids on the iron range be denied her opportunity to further her education because she can't afford to drive and put her kids in day care and make
the most of her graduate experience in a bricks and mortar school? I could go on and on with examples. I digress yet again: back to online:
We'll, I spent 3 fulltime months (no pot making!) to develop this course, I learned D2L (this is the virtual learning environment where students and instructor interact over the course materials, lessons, discussions, quizzes, viewing of student works, etc), took a 6 week course taught by the Dean (who by the way cared very much about quality delivery of online courses, student learning, objectives and goals being reached) on how to teach online. The book is "Teaching Online" - A Practical Guide by Susan Ko and Steve Rossen. Anyway, I had the privilege of receiving some extensive mentoring from a friend before I developed the course who is a fulltime tenured biology professor who teaches all his classes online. He is also an artist. It was he who said "Tony, you could do this this and this with art courses and nobody is doing this yet...you have an opportunity with your background..." It was not hard for me to assimilate the different ways in which to (understand I also
completed a K-12 teacher ed. program) appeal to different learning styles by the ways I developed the curriculum, rubrics, supplementary materials, etc. It was a great deal of work and I am here to tell you that this type of course works great online. There was a great deal of discussion in the discussion area online--more than ever would have taken place in the classroom and from students who for any variety of reasons would have not spoken up in a bricks and mortar situation. Students had to develop thoughtful answers from the reading and discussions and it worked. Students were required to document their process for the studio lessons. Quizzes were open book but timed. I was told that the college had never seen such productive discussion between students. I was merely a facilitator and motivator and guided them along our course objectives and goals and it was successful.
Frankly, Vince, it would have been a lot easier to teach this course face to face because of the all the preparation and maintenance and highly increased student to student and teacher to student interaction that took place online. But I was open to the possibility of it working, I took responsibility for the course and my students learning and they did. It was truly a meeting of the minds, their thoughts about art, artists, political issues of the time, what motivated artists to respond to each other, previous art movements, their own work and process, etc. I have since (over the last 2 years) developed a 2D design course, a 3D design course, a digital photography course, a drawing course and an art history course with the idea that I might teach these courses one day.
You know that I respect I you and value your opinion even though I see you over asserting yourself at times. You also know that I once told you that its too bad you did not offer an MFA because more than likely I would uproot to work with you--and I may still do this if I get accepted somewhere if most of the cost can be worked off through teaching or other assignment. You positively aggravate and challenge people. And I mean that in a positive, growth forming, introspective, re-assessment sort of way. And of course you also just piss people off with some of your cavalier attitudes--and I appreciate those qualities because in the end they cause people to think and challenge their own safe zone now and then. Not everyone has to agree and by god if they do its time to move on. I have also observed that you will also admit when you are wrong, apologize, etc. and I respect that the most because when all is said and done you are still humble intelligent person.
So, you can say what you say but I know it works because I taught it, observed it, and received feedback by both students, the Dean, the tech staff (who were not college lap dogs) all who big bothered my course (with out me knowing) as I taught it. Like you they were concerned about the effectiveness, the legitimacy, etc. They said they would hire me again and I just got a call 2 days ago to teach drawing and ceramics 1 and 2. These courses are face to face so I will be hitting the pavement for 350 miles a week to teach. Why do I want the MFA? I want to teach. Why would I take time from my business, new projects, tool line, new forms and glazes, flexibility and spend a bundle on gas--because I love to teach students about process and all its inherent benefits. I love to see the light go on and the kind of satisfaction that one can only provide for oneself through inspiration, diligence, and seeing something through from beginning to end.
You may not know, but I completed an MA in Visual Arts with a concentration in Ceramics and took an additional 24 graduate credits (a lot of drawing too)--so I understand what you mean my immersion and I've had that. I have also learned more in one year on clayart (much of which validated my knowledge or suspicions) than I ever did during my graduate experience. I did learn the value of critique, formal language, how to see differently, etc. I have 4 kids, a wife, studio where I live, a kiln 2.5 hours away, a virtual ceramic community that provides more than any MFA experience ever could. As Clennel says, I don't live in a safe zone, and it is tough. I try to listen, but idealisms of how things should be and how they really are from the ivory tower are taken with a block of salt these days from those that are not practicing artists. I have friends in both academia and the trenches. I have been told if I had an MFA from various art faculty I would have a job in academia.
I've also been told its highly competitive and that I should look to do other things.
My reason for teaching comes from what I have learned in the trenches and what I feel I could offer to students. Nobody taught me about how to live after graduate school--having children with my wife while in graduate school did that and the commitment to my work and believing if I stay true to my work, I will be able to find a market. This may open up another can of worms but it is easy for Warren McKenzie to say sell pots for the common man when he had/has a university/pension behind him. That is the safe zone--and it is not a bad thing except when you don't know what you are talking about and perpetuating false economic theory about what it takes to live without doing it yourself.
The "insecure zone" as Tony C. calls it has caused the motivation of food or famine, to constantly explore new forms, new work, new venues or markets to sell my work. I am always having to think ahead to make sure money is coming in. I am assuming here, but you can make freely whatever you wish with out having to worry whether or not you sell it. Unfortunately it seems at times, I pretend that I have no money concerns and make what I want, put it out there and hope it sells. We never know how much money is coming in, so yes, a little more sense of security would be nice these days--I think especially for my wife who has supported me with all my dreamer and realist ideas--and yet we have managed to carve out a little existence where I am home more than most fathers, I know my children intimately, I help my wife with whatever she needs "most" of the time. We are poorer and yet richer because of our choices. My heart has always been in teaching and yet my own personal
aesthetic and creative motivations have taken me away from teaching and in the last 2 years now it seems to be heading back in that direction.
I agree with you that American education is suffering. There is no doubt, but to envelope online or distance education into your opinion is, in your words, irresponsible.
I would also agree with you about the motivation of certain Deans--as you have said and their bottom line which is not about the instructor or the student, but about appeasing higher ups, the economic bottom line of the college and other such phenomena. I have also met 2 Deans so far that care deeply about the students and programs. They are rare. As an avid user of technology and having grown up using and programming the first computers, I see technology is just another tool to provide an educational experience. It is not the complete answer to education nor the be or end all, just another tool in the instructor's repertoire.
Now, that said, distance or online is not for everyone but what do you or anyone else know if you have not experienced them from both ends?
Can pottery be taught online? Problem not...yet--there are degrees of probability of what the student will get out of the course based on the nature of the coursework, content, and how its delivered. Pottery would be at the bottom of my list. Even with a cool virtual profile video animation view of hand movement, compression, etc. in my eyes this would only serve as a supplemental or secondary form of primary demonstration by an instructor. Pottery would not be a good course for online for a beginner. Advanced students, however, there are many possibilities. Take a look at Staley's (who participates on this list) work online. He has developed some fantastic ceramic resources for his students.
With respect to online teaching, if the student is a hand holder, online may not be for them. It requires asking more questions, it requires dealing with technology and their own computer, reading and writing more and other demands of the delivery system, in Art, documenting your developmental process as proof you are the author of the work, etc.
I can tell you its actually pretty cool. I hope you will open you mind Vince and at the very least make sure you have a hand in your college's online courses when they are developed to make sure of the quality of the content and student learning. There is no doubt in my mind if you have a hand in your college's development of online courses they will be more than adequate and definitely not lame ass.
.
My very best
Tony Ferguson
Tony Ferguson
...where the sky meets the lake...
Duluth, Minnesota
Artist, Educator, Web Meister
fergyart@yahoo.com
fergy@cpinternet.com
(218) 727-6339
http://www.aquariusartgallery.com
http://www.tonyferguson.net
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
Tony Ferguson on wed 7 jun 06
Vince,
I think we can agree and diagree on certain ideas and points. I also think just talking to other instructors who feel the threat of online with respect to the arts to form your opinion perhaps has its biases which lend themselves to ignorance of how it may or may not work and its success--many of these programs from what I understand have residency requirements of something like 10 days 4 times a year--you work your butt off and every 3 months you meet with other students, faculty for review, critique, present, etc.
I think what we both need as neither of us has experienced directly is to hear from someone who has actually completed an MFA online/distance or whatever it is called exactly to hear what their experience has been like. I have a friend who completed her MFA from Vermont I think and I am going to try to see if she will offer comment on this subject. She was hired by a University to teach by the way. I too am a passionate person so I understand how you can feel about this subject and others. Be well.
Tony Ferguson
Vince Pitelka wrote:
Dear Tony -
I appreciate your long and well-reasoned defense of online and distance
degree programs, and your reasons for choosing that avenue towards an MFA.
I never said that online or distance classes were inherently ineffective. I
said that an online or distance MFA program could, at best, offer only a
watered-down version of an on-site residency MFA program. I stand by that.
In your case, I don't think it really matters. With all the experience you
have, and all the graduate credits you have already taken, I don't think it
is going to much of a difference whether you pursue your MFA on-site at a
bricks-and-mortar institution. Either way, you are a committed and able
teacher, and if you complete your MFA via a distance graduate program, I
expect that you will be better qualified than 90% of the people who complete
their programs in residency.
I can't really compare my situation to yours, because my wife and I only
have one child, but we were both in grad school simultaneously, getting by
with tuition wavers, small stipends, and student loans. We made it work,
and the considedrable student loan debt we accumulated was a very small
price to pay for what we got out of it.
I commend you for developing the online art appreciation course. I think
that art appreciation and art history courses can be taught very effectively
online. We have talked before about online studio art courses, and you
already know what I think about that. I don't think they are or ever well
be an effective way to teach studio art. Don't assume that this is a
"cavalier" attitude as you imply. I have talked to studio art faculty all
over the country about this, and we feel that online teaching of studio art
is just one of many things threatening the quality and effectiveness of
studio art instruction in academia today. Of course a student should do
whatever they can to accommodate the needs of their students, but not to an
extent where the quality and effectiveness of the education is severely
compromised.
No one has ever asked me to teach an online or distance course. There is
nothing personally defensive in my attitude here, because there would be no
reason for me to be defensive. But I am committed to defending the quality
of art studio instruction in academia, and I do see the move towards
distance or online teaching of studio art as a serious threat.
Tony, some of the response I have recieved in this thread is very worrisome,
including many of your comments. The implication that I would express such
strong and emotional opinions "from a vacuum" is a bit insulting. I think
you know me better than that. And your characterization of "an
overabundance of animosity towards this subject" is a bit odd. It seems
like animosity to you, because you are convinced that distance and online
education in the studio arts are okay. I am convinced that the whole
concept ofonline and distance education in studio art is inherently
defective, and as a professional academic with strong feelings about the
teaching of studio art, I feel compelled to speak out about this. Is it
fair to characterize that as "an overabundance of animosity?"
I do regret the "lame-ass" reference. That was careless of me. But I stand
by my convictions on this. For anyone who has not done previous graduate
work and accumulated the experience you have, but wants to get the MFA in
order to teach, doing it via a distance education program would rob them of
so much of the richness and experience that an MFA can offer, and much of
the experience that could make them a good teacher. Linda Arbuckle
explained that very well in a recent post. Getting an MFA with the intent
of becoming a teacher is all about immersing oneself in the opportunities
that grad school offers, and there is no way that a student could even begin
to take advantage of those opportunities without being there onsite.
There are all sorts of opportunities that are available in life only by
making the necessary commitment and sacrifices. Getting an MFA or PhD fits
into this category. These things simply are not available to those who
cannot make the commitment and sacrifices, nor should they be. The people
who really want a terminal degree will always figure out a way to make it
work.
You said "I have always felt the individual was the person most responsible
for his or her "degree" of learning anyway." That's always true in
college - the successful student must be very proactive and involved,
aggressively seeking opportunity and experience, So, if the person is going
to go for an MFA, shouldn't they have just as much exposure to opportunity
and experience as everyone else? Why would anyone want to go for a terminal
degree and them purposefully put themselves in a position where they will be
"left out" of so much of the important substance of the degree program? It
makes no sense at all.
You said "The age of the traditional student is gone." Tony, in art there's
no such thing as "the traditional student" and there never has been. The
nature of students and the theories of education are always evolving, and
the teacher must respond in kind. But that should never entail sacrificing
the quality and effectiveness of education. As I said in an earlier
message, technological advancement qualifies as progress only if it really
represents a move forwards beyond previously available methods. Online
studio art instruction does not fit that category. Adjusting education in
order to "get up to speed with the demographics of who is out there and
their needs" makes sense only if the quality of education can be maintained.
We cannot respond to a "stated need" to make education or more convenient
and accessible if it also means a deterioration in the quality.
My advice to you is to go ahead and get that MFA by whatever means you can
if it will bring you more teaching opportunities. A person with your
experience, passion, and commitment should be teaching.
- Vince
Vince Pitelka
Appalachian Center for Craft, Tennessee Technological University
Smithville TN 37166, 615/597-6801 x111
vpitelka@dtccom.net, wpitelka@tntech.edu
http://iweb.tntech.edu/wpitelka/
http://www.tntech.edu/craftcenter/
______________________________________________________________________________
Send postings to clayart@lsv.ceramics.org
You may look at the archives for the list or change your subscription
settings from http://www.ceramics.org/clayart/
Moderator of the list is Mel Jacobson who may be reached at melpots@pclink.com.
Tony Ferguson
...where the sky meets the lake...
Duluth, Minnesota
Artist, Educator, Web Meister
fergyart@yahoo.com
fergy@cpinternet.com
(218) 727-6339
http://www.aquariusartgallery.com
http://www.tonyferguson.net
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
Bonnie Staffel on thu 8 jun 06
Vince wrote -=20
just one of many things threatening the quality and effectiveness of =
studio
art instruction in academia today.
I just had to write here from my own experience when I taught workshops =
and
week long classes I heard the comments of many students such as,. "I =
have
learned more here in just one week than I have learned in a whole course =
in
college." =20
Now I didn't pin it down as to whether they were taking BA, MA or MFA
courses, but the scuttlebutt I have heard quite often is that the
Universities like to have a "name" potter to draw the students, but the =
name
potter usually makes a pass through the studio once during the day,
demonstrates the lesson and then disappears for the rest of the day into =
his
own studio (or off for a beer with his co-profs ) =20
I have heard this from the time of the late 80's when I was teaching =
quite a
bit up to more recently at my workshops. Nothing seems to have changed =
over
the years.
Regards,
Bonnie Staffel
http://webpages.charter.net/bstaffel/
DVD Throwing with Coils and Slabs
DVD Beginning Processes
Charter Member Potters Council
http://www.vasefinder.com/online_mus.html
| |
|
