“The proposed agent to carry out this scheme is the area’s community colleges. This will not work.”
I WAS SURPRISED to hear the notion of a Freshman Foundation Program had already been discussed and proposed as a key part of PTP's initiative to launch the Triad into national design prominence. Foundation courses, which would form a common education for students destined to study architecture, publishing design, interior design, fashion, film, ceramics, etc. has been core to the success of such professional art schools like Rhode Island School of Design, my alma mater.
The proposed agent to carry out this scheme is the area's community colleges. This will not work. While they are adept at rapidly training workers based on employers' demands, these two-year institutes don't have the structure or resources to support a true foundation program. For example, the central idea of the foundation concept is that students are involved in intense, first year general design courses before specializing. The historic strength of a community college education is its rapid turnaround and entry of its graduates into the workforce. Courses are structured to move as quickly as possible, concentrating on current industry practices and history, criticism and theory are glossed over in order to cover as much ground as possible. But in a four-year art school, foundation courses are taught by foundation faculty, not drawn from faculty members already specialized in Web publishing, game design, fashion design, or architecture. Meaning, the faculty who teach foundation are committed to the integrity of Design as a process and way of thinking. They are not committed to any industry standard or software or the trends of any particular specialization.
At RISD, I took two- and three-dimensional design, drawing, photography and a materials course. All the courses were about the development of a student's critical language and skills, understanding of process, history, craftsmanship, and materials. The purpose of the faculty teaching these courses was not to prep students to be good architects, filmmakers or glassblowers. It was to inculcate us with a sense of mission, purpose, and seriousness about what we were doing, and to clear our heads of preconceptions and other obstacles to creativity. Of the many artists, designers and teachers I met and studied under at RISD and Yale, RISD's Freshman Foundation faculty left the greatest impression on me.
It is arguable, too, whether any Triad university or college is in a position to offer a real foundation program. University classes require prerequisites and oblige students to take basic courses, but without a dedicated, experienced foundation faculty, single philosophy, and concentrated time frame, the result tends to produce graduates who are good specialists but who lack the kind of range, vision, and thinking that could rocket the area to national prominence.
Another way to look at the sturdiness of the commitment to teach Foundation is to examine the commitment to staffing. An administrator's solution, especially in this disastrous economic downturn, will probably be to redirect faculty who've previously taught their specialization to now teach Foundation. Instructors with years of professional and educational experience doing one thing would then be set on an entirely new track into (for faculty who have never themselves learned or taught under a foundation program) foreign land.
It's tempting to kick these sorts of issues down the road, but without addressing them now it raises questions about the ultimate success of the endeavor.
