Why We Need a Great Australian Art & Design
school
(and How to Make One)
I
have been thinking a lot in the last few months about where Australian tertiary
art and design education sits in relation to international competitors. Also,
about how it is valued by government. I have long seen the contribution of art
and design to the economic, as well as cultural, wealth of a nation as a
self-evident truth, and schools of art and design as the wellsprings of this
process. Yet, it occurs to me that in Australia today this view is not shared.
Instead we are faced with a largely instrumentalist view of culture as static,
rather than dynamic and in a constant state of emergence and renewal. And in
spite of a current near obsession with the term ‘innovation’, we appear also to
be faced with policy makers who do not fully understand the contribution that
art and design makes to the national economy, or the huge potential that exists
for exploiting our creative industries here and internationally in the future.
I
realised early on in my thoughts that Australia has no globally prominent
schools of art and design, as measured by metrics such as international reputation, league
tables, diversity of staff, or international student demand. I argue that if
government and business is really to capitalise on this opportunity, it needs
to invest in the creation of at least one or two top Australian schools of art and design to produce
the creative human capital to effect this transformation.
The
following essay aims to explore some of the context and underlying issues for
Australia’s schools of art and design, and to propose a broad vision for
establishing our own top-ranked schools. An earlier version was completed in
early September and circulated to a few colleagues and friends. I offer this
revised version more broadly now in the hope that it stimulates further
reflection, discussion and, perhaps, action.
*
Introduction
Art
and Design schools are the crucibles into which creativity is poured, bubbles
and is transformed. Art and design graduates touch every aspect of our lives,
culture and values, from the way we think and look at things, and the nature of
the objects we use and daily take for granted, to the health of our economy.
Imagine
a workforce without artists and designers.
Imagine
a society without art.
There would be no reflections of the world around us
that simultaneously inform and transport us into other realms. No arena for
innovation. No creativity. No culture. And innovation and creativity are the
things that drive the growth and health of a thriving society. Culture is the
thing that makes us human.
Australia
does pretty well in art and design education at tertiary level. But do we have
any really great art schools? The best of them are nestled in the university
system. I’m thinking of places like UNSW Art & Design (University of New
South Wales), the Victorian College of the Arts (University of Melbourne), RMIT
University, Melbourne, the Queensland College of Art (Griffith University), and,
of course, my own school, Sydney College of the Arts (University of Sydney).
All have produced lots of graduates of high national standing as artists,
designers and other arts professionals. And even a few of our graduates have
achieved the kinds of international reputations that Australians have somehow
come to expect of our film actors in recent years. These A-listers include uber
product designer Marc Newson (SCA), artists Shaun Gladwell (UNSW Art &
Design and SCA), Ben Quilty (SCA) and Tracey Moffatt (QCA), and filmmaker Jane
Campion (SCA). Yet the names of Australian schools don’t generally trip off the
tongue when asked to name the top ones in the world (an inexact science, I
know, but the results are confirmed by evidence such as league tables and lists
of internationally prominent alumni). In response to my own rhetorical question
I hear myself saying, ‘Goldsmiths (UK), Rhode Island School of Design (USA),
Parsons (USA), the School of the Art Institute of Chicago (USA), the Gerrit
Rietveld Academie (The Netherlands), the Royal College of Art (UK), Central St
Martins (UK) …’ So, what do they do that we don’t?
Perhaps
a better first question is, ‘Do they do things that we don’t?’ At the level of
curriculum design the answer to that question is a guarded no. The curriculums of
the best Australian schools compare well with the best in the world. In some
cases Australia has even led the pack. Postgraduate education in art and design
is world leading in the best of our art schools. And Australian universities
were among the first in the world to offer practice-based doctorates in visual art.
So, if it’s not curriculum in itself that makes the difference between a really
good school and a great school, what is it that does? I would argue that the
answer is to be found in aspects of the histories and geographical contexts of
these other places listed above that are not reproduced anywhere in Australia.
It’s not even just a question of age: the Queensland College of Art was
established in 1881, for example, and the origins of the Victorian College of
the Arts go back even further to 1867. And these dates are comparable with most
of the international institutions mentioned in my list of world leaders. Rather
the fundamental difference is formed out of what has been achievable in the
contexts in which these various schools have operated since their founding. In
short, overseas institutions like Goldsmiths, Central St Martins, Parsons and
the Art Institute of Chicago have hosted an international mix of staff and
students from the start and are located in densely populated urban locations in
which commerce and industry thrive in concentrated form. Moreover, these
histories have produced not only strong local markets for art and design
consumption, but also significant industry partnerships and philanthropic
support along the way.
Internationalism, business, art and design
Australia,
of course, nowadays counts itself as an internationalist, multicultural, and
connected nation. But it has some catching up to do in the area of art and
design. Until relatively recently the country was very isolated from global
affairs as a result of its geographical distance from the centres of world
economic and political power. Even with the recent rise to prominence of Asia as
economic power and Australia’s own self-positioning as part of the ‘Asian
Century’, it is worth noting that Beijing, the capital city of our biggest
trading partner, China is closer to London than it is to Sydney or Melbourne
and more or less the same distance from Sydney as it is from San Francisco. Australia,
meanwhile, is much further away from London or San Francisco than is Beijing.
In
many ways distance has been collapsed in the last few decades, through greater
ease and speed of travel and the advent of a highly sophisticated virtual
space, making it easier for Australia to be connected to, and do business with,
the rest of the world. Add to this increases in, and greater diversity of, Australia’s
population and it’s easy to see how a place like Sydney can now be truly
counted as a world city.
Even
in a global society, though, art and design relies on a strong local culture of
consumption. And in the most successful instances art and design largely produces that culture locally, enhanced
by international interaction. The training and retention of artists and
designers of the highest quality is an essential part of this process. Yet, if
Australia was a relative latecomer to the global marketplace, it has been more
than any other thing late in seeing the global economic and cultural
opportunities of growing its own local strengths in art and design.
For
most of the last two hundred-odd years Australia was an importer of art and
design innovation and an exporter of talent. Until at least the end of the
1970s ambitious graduates of Australia’s art and design schools usually sought
to launch their careers overseas (especially in Europe), likely never to return
(think Sidney Nolan or Jeffrey Smart, for example). Nowadays there are signs at
least of the existence of global Australian art and design citizens – if Marc
Newson and Shaun Gladwell are currently based overseas, they remain (like their
professionally close to, and immersed in, the Australian art and design
industries. The numbers of such individuals are small, though.
Transformation is needed in art and design
tertiary education
Transformation
is possible, but not overnight, but it can be encouraged and enabled.
Part
of the answer lies in Federal Government and its agencies selling contemporary art
and design overseas much more aggressively – not just product, but also
expertise. And although I’m thinking here about the role of the Australia
Council for the Arts to some extent, I believe that this is even more a
responsibility of the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade. Art and design
is big business worldwide. Culture is big business.
Government
needs something to sell, though. And that means a globally competitive art and
design resource. So, what concerns me here is the root driver of this
transformation of Australia into recognised international player in art and
design, namely the conditions in which we train and educate future generations
of artists and designers in this country. We need to establish at least one or
two world-class schools to educate future generations of top Australian artists
and designers by creating conditions that organically exist in other great
innovative cities, like New York, London, or Milan
We
have the building blocks in place, in the best of our current schools. So, what
more needs to be done? What might an internationally prominent Australian art
school look like?
The
key enablers for creating a world-prominent art and design school are top
quality students and staff, a bedrock, relevant curriculum, a culture of
innovation and creativity, and integration into the commercial world. A broad
curriculum across the range of art and design disciplines is the key bedrock on
which a successful structure can be built. Consistently top quality learning
and teaching delivery across the full range of art and design disciplines
guarantees achievement of institutional reputation. Currently, even the best
Australian schools either concentrate on or are strong only in individual
aspects.
Top international
schools attract the best and most promising students – a constantly renewing,
diverse group of intelligent, creative and visual people. They are thinkers and makers. Students are the very stuff of the
school; they are the group that interacts most closely and most productively
together, forming informal hothouse teams and personal friendships and alliances
that will take them into professional life, both at home and overseas. They are
the future.
A
mix of undergraduate and postgraduate education is crucial. Not all graduates
will do postgraduate study (and graduating students must be work ready at
whichever stage they leave education), but most ambitious artists and designers
take advantage of the chance for deeper, more focused postgraduate learning,
together with closer encounters with industry.
Critical
mass is also important – the most successful full-service art and design
schools in the world have a student population of four or five thousand. Cities
like Sydney (pop. 4.8m) or Melbourne (pop. 4m) can easily sustain such a
population, with a mix of domestic and international students. However, in each
city, it shouldn’t be a case of creating yet another school to add to the ones
already in existence, but perhaps merging the best of them to form a single hub
of global art and design excellence. If this sounds contentious, it’s worth
remembering that one of the main reasons cities like London (pop. 8.6m) and New
York City (pop. 8.4 m) can support more than one globally-reputable art and
design school is partly because their populations are about double those of
Melbourne or Sydney and because, unlike their Australian counterparts, they are
in close proximity to other highly populous areas.
Besides
institutional reputation, the greatest draw card for any prospective art and
design student is the staff. World-class schools have world-class staff.
Academics must be prominent, practicing artists, designers and thinkers who are
trained, reflexive teachers. Their teaching must be supported by specialist
technical staff who are experts in the various media necessary for artists and
designers to make things (and even in these digital and virtual times it is
necessary for artists and designers to be makers).
Learning in art and design is especially reliant on active experience – of
making things and trying out concepts, of learning from peers, and of enjoying
the widest possible exposure to art and design professionals, and real life
industry experience. Top schools therefore augment the regular academic staff
body with specialist visiting teachers who are artists, designers and industry
professionals to provide concentrated, inspirational learning opportunities.
Australia
already has good academics and highly competent technicians. But schools of
true global standing expose students to a diverse range of international art
and design leaders. Through these interactions, global networks are created
between individuals and institutions, resulting also in outward movement of
staff, students and graduates. Unlike London or New York, opportunities to do
this in Australia by catching international stars passing through town are few,
so it’s necessary to create the conditions for this to happen, by funding
visiting professor and lecturer positions that carry with them short- and
long-term residencies. By virtue of their very nature such residencies provide
constant renewal of staff and therefore of student experience. And this kind of
renewal is essential for innovation in the creative environment.
Setting
is important. Perhaps more important than the quality of the physical
facilities. Training artists and designers and preparing them to enter the
workforce as tomorrow’s leaders in creativity and innovation demands a context
in which they are cheek by jowl with the collaborators, employers, markets and
audiences that give them life. And the larger the population and local economy,
the higher the chance of creating a self-regenerating dynamic of world class
industry professionals helping to produce the next generation. In Australia
such a concentration can only realistically be found currently in its two world
cities, Sydney and Melbourne. In both places a global art and design school would
be at the heart of the buzz of a truly live local environment, characterised by
creativity, innovation, pace, business, clients, partners, patrons, and
cultural institutions. A context providing the opportunities for building
contacts and networks that are so important for pursuing a career in art and
design. It is also a context in which the school can make real partnerships
with industry in order to drive innovation together through research
collaboration and live projects for undergraduates.
Facilities
are also important. Artists and designers develop best when they have access to
good physical spaces and appropriate tools and equipment. Studios are an
important aspect of the learning experience, not an expensive luxury. Creative
growth is strongest when human interaction – and competition – is facilitated.
In any art and design school worthy of the name, this is focused around the
concept of the studio. These spaces are the hothouses of learning and
creativity – not individual, monkish cells, but large, flexible, open spaces
that encourage interaction. Studios are augmented by workshops and laboratories
– the toolboxes, if you will. And ideas are tested and brought for the first
time to public gaze in their experimental form, through the provision of
galleries and project spaces.
What makes a sustainable art and design
school?
Art
and design education can be expensive. Class sizes are necessarily relatively
small in the learning encounter with academic discipline specialists. The 300+
mass lecture experience common in many subjects cannot be an effective feature
of world-class learning in art and design. However, over-exposure to teaching
staff is also dangerous for practical learners, producing over-reliance and
rigid ideas. Top art and design schools attract the best and most promising
students. And top quality students are proactive learners who require shorter,
intense experiences of inspirational teaching, supplemented by opportunities to
develop creative ideas with their peers and alone. Less able or committed
students need more time with teachers to get them to a benchmark level. This
should not be the job of the world-class school.
It
is possible, therefore, to produce a business model that will deliver highest
quality learning and research resources, in a financially efficient and
sustainable form. The number of salaried academic staff should be set at a
proportion necessary to maintain continuity of student contact across the
discipline spread and to manage the operation and development of curriculum,
leaving resource available for the appointment of local and international
visiting artists and designers to provide constantly renewing experiences of
inspirational content. Most academic staff would be on fractional,
teaching-intensive appointments, giving individuals space in the working week
to maintain active parallel careers as artists and designers (another reason to
establish schools in large, urban centres). More formalised staff research
activity is also necessary for the culture of any school that engages in
postgraduate education and which seeks active partnerships and collaboration
with industry and government. Therefore internal research funds should be
maintained for dispensation as necessary and useful to assist for seed funding
or for the completion of important research projects.
Facilities
costs are the largest expense after salaries. Currently these are seriously
underutilised in all Australian art and design schools, including long breaks
in which no learning takes place. Artists and designers tend to want to just
keep going – creativity doesn’t keep office hours – and the introduction of a
trimester structure, which allows maximum teaching delivery over a full
calendar year makes good educational and financial sense (compare with the
current two semester structure which is the current norm in Australian
universities, and which includes average 12 week summer and 4 week winter
breaks). This would keep the campus active year round without having to look
for other activities that are not core business to fill in the large
non-teaching spaces (a double business saving) and would fully ustilise
technical and administrative staff over the full working year. Academics need
space for research and professional practice, so the obvious thing is to look
at the American model, where academics are paid for 2/3 of the calendar year
(this can be spread over 12 months, if that makes sense financially for the
organisation and individuals). This also gives students an opportunity to
complete their degree more quickly if they so desire.
Finally,
the introduction of distance learning components will reduce physical and
technical staff resource needs. In the postgraduate space in particular, it
also facilitates engagement with international top quality students, without
those students having to be resident in country throughout their degree. It
also enables a level of MOOC engagement that helps particularly in the
marketing and brand positioning space of schools nationally and
internationally.
Australia
can support one or two globally important art and design schools that will fit
easily onto a world’s-best list. We need them sooner rather than later not for
the A-list reputation alone, but because schools that employ the best creative
talent to work with the best creative students will contribute more than
anything else to Australia’s future economy.