Sacramento State offers a BFA in Photography

[MattKing]

Matt was arguing as though other people were saying it - specifically Alan.

Not quite.
More that people were suggesting that there should be a lot more "business training" offered in a program that seems to neither be business oriented nor likely equipped to provide it.
I've spent enough time around post-secondary educational programs to know that it is important that they remain focused, and that they should teach to their existing strengths.
You really don't want talented artists teaching you how to handle sales tax and payroll obligations, or the complexities of being an employer!

 

[Don_ih]

Not quite.
More that people were suggesting that there should be a lot more "business training" offered in a program that seems to neither be business oriented nor likely equipped to provide it.
I've spent enough time around post-secondary educational programs to know that it is important that they remain focused, and that they should teach to their existing strengths.
You really don't want talented artists teaching you how to handle sales tax and payroll obligations, or the complexities of being an employer!

Far as I'm concerned, you would have said nothing if it had been proposed by anyone other than Alan.

And no one is saying that artists should be teaching business classes. If you paid attention, you would know that.

Instead, you just keep talking about something that would not happen ever. No university would get non-specialists to teach business to anyone. No one here is proposing that would happen.

 

[MattKing]

No university would get non-specialists to teach business to anyone. No one here is proposing that would happen.

Particular a University program like this, with just three faculty members, all of whom have MFAs in either Fine Arts, or Visual Arts, or Art and Design.
Who would no doubt be supervising any courses offered.

 

[CMoore]

Matt was arguing as though other people were saying it - specifically Alan.

Good thing Alan did not mention camera maintenance or 'repair'.
He might have been scolded for advocating for the conflation of a BFA degree and a Diesel Mechanics certificate.

I did not go to school, but i have great respect for those that did.
I certainly am not trying to sully the reputation and purpose.
But i see no reason for 'alarm' at the idea of adding...st least the Option Of... educating the holder of a BFA or MFA with some very valuable info on how to run a 'for profit' business that is centered on their expertise in the world of art.
Like i say, it could be totally optional. Aimed at helping those that are seeking the help. Help that the degree program may not offer.
There is no need to 'restructure' or evolve the traditions of pursuing a degree.

You might graduate at THE Top in your class of orthopedic surgeons.
But you want to talk to practicing surgeons regards.............arbitration, LLC or LLP, hospital administration pitfalls, sexual harassment, etc etc etc.
Cannot both things happen at the same time, for the good of the student.. without backlash from the stalwarts of education.?

 

[koraks]

No university would get non-specialists to teach business to anyone.

Yes, they do. Particularly whenever program management isn't capable of accurately estimating someone's competence in a field that's far removed from their own. This is one of the reasons why it's a tricky proposition.

But i see no reason for 'alarm' at the idea of adding...st least the Option Of... educating the holder of a BFA or MFA with some very valuable info on how to run a 'for profit' business that is centered on their expertise in the world of art.

In principle there's nothing wrong with that idea IMO, but if you read back, a lot of resistance emerged from the implication that the duty to include such business education should be forced upon curriculums one way or another.

 

[Don_ih]

Particularly whenever program management isn't capable of accurately estimating someone's competence in a field that's far removed from their own.

I meant no university would knowingly hire someone to teach a particular course unless that person had relevant credentials. And the staff that manages the Fine Arts programs would not be the ones hiring business professors. Universities tend to already have a department full of those people.

But I also said that the best approach would be informal and voluntary - workshop based -, since there would be no existing business courses that would be of any practical use for a BFA student. And that would likely involve people of dubious competence. But it would at least create awareness.

if you read back, a lot of resistance emerged

There wasn't a lot of resistance to the idea over the past 4 pages, actually. Or at least, there were not a lot of people resisting. There was one person arguing and a chorus of hear-hear men. Even the OP (BradS) said the whole thing is "bullshit" but also that students could take those courses if they wanted.

 

[koraks]

And the staff that manages the Fine Arts programs would not be the ones hiring business professors.

Huh? In my experience, that's exactly what happens. Selection of staff for curriculums is generally delegated to the department level with no obligation to consult with external parties.

Universities tend to already have a department full of those people.

Which doesn't mean that's where the teachers for such a course will be selected from. People get 'flown in' from all corners all the time.

 

[Don_ih]

Selection of staff for curriculums is generally delegated to the department level with no obligation to consult with external parties.

Degree programs require courses from outside a major all the time. You need math courses to get a chemistry degree, for example - they will be courses offered in the math department. But it hardly matters - this tangent of discussion is even less useful than the idea that they teach business classes at trade school....

 

[VinceInMT]

Yes, they do. Particularly whenever program management isn't capable of accurately estimating someone's competence in a field that's far removed from their own. This is one of the reasons why it's a tricky proposition….

And here is another issue. In higher ed, the primary requirement to teach, either on staff or as an adjunct, is the holding of a masters degree. There is generally no requirement that the candidate has ever taken a course in pedagogy. The individual may have expertise and experience in the subject matter but no knowledge or ability to break that information down, develop a set of lesson plans with the necessary scope and sequence, have knowledge of different learning styles and the ability to adapt the material for all learners, an ability to do proper assessment of student learning, and numerous other traits that make a good teacher.

 

[koraks]

There is generally no requirement that the candidate has ever taken a course in pedagogy.

I don't know about the US, but where I live, there's no legal requirement for such a course, but academic teaching staff are required by their own institutions to obtain formal qualification for teaching in the first few years of their tenure. The qualification process involves 'learning on the job', reflection on the basis of collected evidence and reporting on the process in the form of a kind of thesis that's also defended to a committee upon completion.

There are loopholes for e.g. external staff that are not employed by universities proper, but hired on a contract basis. To what extent their performance is monitored, depends a bit on specifics. In general, though, all institutions track teacher performance through surveys. Moreover, teaching is virtually never an activity that is performed in splendid isolation and as such, there's fairly close scrutiny (directly, and indirectly through students' accounts).

While it's possible to land a teaching job with no formal didactic qualifications, it's at least where I live and have worked virtually impossible to hold such a position without such qualifications (formalized or not).

Of course, there will always be 'good' and 'bad' professors. The people I've worked with, I would however all qualify as competent, but some were/are more appreciated by students and/or colleagues than others. Moreover, the fact that there's still considerable freedom in shaping one's didactic style is in my view one of the strengths of a well-functioning education system and higher education in particular.

 

[MattKing]

I think it is a great idea that students be encouraged to learn a bunch of really useful and practical things that aren't purely "photography". But adding courses to the Sacramento program's core requirements doesn't make sense to me.
What I would advocate for would be an arrangement with the institution's student support infrastructure - the part that helps with career planning and, if they offer it, co-op programs, internships and work experience placements. Formal and informal mentorship programs can also be invaluable.
People running those sorts of programs would be far more likely to serve as useful resources for non-Fine Arts subjects.
A very important question would be whether the successful completion of such a course component would be a requirement for being granted the degree. If not, they may as well just farm it out as an elective from another resource. If successful completion is a requirement, then adding the course would be much more complicated.
That program has a very small Faculty - three professors/assistant professors. But they are a degree granting program - not just a certificate but a degree. I don't know specifically how things compare in Sacramento, but my understanding is that degree granting programs around here usually go through accreditation procedures, are regularly evaluated by both within university and extra-university entities, and those bodies will need to see justification if they intend to add a non-core subject to graduation requirements. Issues like the qualifications and credentials of the people offering the non-core subject, who is supervising those people, and what their relevant qualifications and credentials are, what resources are available to deal with student appeals - all need to be addressed if the program is to retain its accreditation. And all of those requirements are quite burdensome for such a small program.
This is not a night school certificate program. If it were, adding another elective would be relatively easy.

 

[faberryman]

Anybody else think there is something odd about the assumption that, unless a BFA student takes a business course, upon graduation the student will become a burden to society? There are employment opportunities for BFA graduates other than being a starving artist living in a garret looking for gallery representation. I don't see the same hand-wringing about the other majors in the humanities.

 

[Don_ih]

Anybody else think there is something odd about the assumption that, unless a BFA student takes a business course, upon graduation the student will become a burden to society?

Why, yes! That is odd.

from "Artists Report Back: A National Study on the Lives of Arts Graduates and Working Artists".

They do ultimately find work, though. I'm sure most of them do.

 

[Don_ih]

Incidentally, one of the recommendations from the report I just mentioned:

"The majority of arts graduates work in​

non-art occupations to support themselves. Arts education should acknowledge​

and prepare art students for this eventuality. A disavowal of the connection between​

expensive tuition and future work and financial independence is no longer realistic​

or ethical. Preparation for artistic work in other fields, including arts management​

and administration, as well as training in artist-owned businesses, is essential."​

See here.

 

[faberryman]

Interesting organization and authors who prepared the report. It is a birds-eye view of a large swath of disciplines, e.g. writers, authors, artists, actors, photographers, musicians, singers, producers, directors, performers, choreographers, dancers, and entertainers, based on 2010 census data.

 

[VinceInMT]

Over the years I’ve read that having a 4-year degree has value in the workplace regardless of whether the recipient is working in their major field. I suppose that’s because having the degree shows that the person is probably literate, trainable, and has evidence of having completed a goal. While the actual number varies based of what study is cited, it appears that the majority of college graduates are working in a field not related to their major.

And while I admit that this is completely anecdotal, as a recent BFA grad I know what quite a few of my fellow BFA grads over the past couple of years are doing these days. Some are in the classrooms of the K-12 system as art teachers. One works in the warehouse at FedEx. One is a department manager at Walmart. One went into teaching and started a wedding photography gig on the side and after a couple years, dropped out of teaching and is doing photography full time. Another worked in a paint store for a while but now is the office manage in a funeral home. Another is the education director at our local art museum. One just became our city’s first artist-in-residence. One works at the Flight 93 memorial in Pennsylvania. Another works at a garden center and is in a band. Another runs an apiary. And a few are off in MFA programs. Not scientific but does show the range of paths people go down after graduation.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Anybody else think there is something odd about the assumption that, unless a BFA student takes a business course, upon graduation the student will become a burden to society? There are employment opportunities for BFA graduates other than being a starving artist living in a garret looking for gallery representation. I don't see the same hand-wringing about the other majors in the humanities.

I though the original posts and that assumption are apocryphal and are so full of bunk that it gives bunk a undeserved bad name.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Over the years I’ve read that having a 4-year degree has value in the workplace regardless of whether the recipient is working in their major field. I suppose that’s because having the degree shows that the person is probably literate, trainable, and has evidence of having completed a goal. While the actual number varies based of what study is cited, it appears that the majority of college graduates are working in a field not related to their major.

And while I admit that this is completely anecdotal, as a recent BFA grad I know what quite a few of my fellow BFA grads over the past couple of years are doing these days. Some are in the classrooms of the K-12 system as art teachers. One works in the warehouse at FedEx. One is a department manager at Walmart. One went into teaching and started a wedding photography gig on the side and after a couple years, dropped out of teaching and is doing photography full time. Another worked in a paint store for a while but now is the office manage in a funeral home. Another is the education director at our local art museum. One just became our city’s first artist-in-residence. One works at the Flight 93 memorial in Pennsylvania. Another works at a garden center and is in a band. Another runs an apiary. And a few are off in MFA programs. Not scientific but does show the range of paths people go down after graduation.

Another example showing that having a college degree has benefits outside ones major. While some can have a good living without graduating from college, statistically one is still better with a college degree.

 

[Vaughn]

My daughter in law graduated from Cornell University with Magna cum Loude in art history and then went on to get her MS is art history. She is the art librian at William College in Massachusetts. She did not take business courses and is hardly a starving artist. So take the starving artist pompous statements and put them in a posterior orifice.

My son graduated summa cum laude from Cornell with a double major, Asian Art & Culture, and Religious Studies, and got a job in Japan teaching English to kindergarners. Now working for a French international company in Tokyo. Ya never know...

 

[chriscrawfordphoto]

As @MattKing pointed out, there are better people prepared to teach business practices outside the art schools.

Not really. Every single professor I had at IU was a working professional artist. Many of them made more money from their creative work than they made teaching. Some of them did purely fine art work, some did only commercial work, and some did both. They all refused to teach us how to make a living, something they all knew how to do. Frankly, I think they were more than happy to pocket their university paychecks, but didn't want us to really succeed and compete with them outside the classroom.

 

[chriscrawfordphoto]

Why, yes! That is odd.

View attachment 345852
from "Artists Report Back: A National Study on the Lives of Arts Graduates and Working Artists".

They do ultimately find work, though. I'm sure most of them do.

Few find work as artists. There are virtually NO jobs. I've been a fulltime professional artist for damned near 30 years. Of the 30 or so people who graduated with me from the fine arts department of IU Fort Wayne, just five succeeded in making a living as artists. Three of us were photo majors; and of us three, one does portrait photography and the other two (myself included) do commercial photography. All three of us are self-employed small businesspeople. The other two people who made a living were graphic design majors who found jobs with local ad agencies.

 

[VinceInMT]

Art history majors have to take a few studio classes but, generally, are not artists themselves.