[iDC] sharing "new media" curricula/potentials

[Shawn Lawson]

Hello, I'm Shawn Lawson, new/digital media artist, teaching at  
Rensselaer.

I'd like to add another question by extending from Tiffany's  
questions and Blanca's post. Then relate my own experiences as a  
student and professor at Carnegie Mellon, a student at School of the  
Art Institute of Chicago, and professor at RPI.

In relation to new media literacy, theory and technique; what is the  
expectation of admitted graduate and/or PhD students? What is the  
expectation of faculty to keep current?

The CMU curriculum has primarily two major parts: technique and  
concept. All undergraduates regardless of focus are required to take  
all of the drawing, painting, sculpting, electronic media, etc. Then  
they can build a concentration of either (Painting, Drawing,  
Printmaking) or (Sculpture, Installation, Site Work) or (Electronic  
Time Based). All undergraduates must take concept development  
courses, where students are presented with a topic or theme and asked  
to explore without media restriction. This course progression leads  
to a full year senior project, where a student is expected to  
carryout self-directed work and exhibit in a final show. Many of the  
students will mix new media with other media. And several will  
explore campus looking to build interdisciplinary relationships, most  
commonly with Computer Science, Human Computer Interaction, or  
Robotics.  The graduate program is very reliant on the student's self  
motivation, and is mixed in primary media discipline. Graduate  
students acquire new media theory from class and personal research,  
while technical skills are learned from individual studio advising  
and personal research. Graduate students are required to engage the  
local community with their work. The art school has a strong presence  
on campus and is active in reaching out. CMU is also home to the  
Studio for Creative Inquiry, which is a residency for artists to  
connect with any academic discipline on campus.

My SAIC experience is only from a graduate perspective. The Art and  
Technology Studies department mixes new media theory with technique.  
And, personal research is highly encouraged. Students are pushed to  
be active in Chicago, the surrounding area, and beyond. I think that  
there are some isolationist tendencies due to the size and  
competitiveness of the school. There are opportunities for  
interdisciplinary collaboration with other artists, although other  
collaboration disciplines becomes more of a challenge. Established  
relationships and networking with through faculty and administration  
can be successful.

RPI also mixes new media theory with technique at both undergraduate  
an graduate levels. There is a core se of courses that undergraduates  
complete before choosing a concentration of:  Visual Arts &  
Animation, Computer Music & Sound Art, Video & Emerging Media, and  
Art, Technology & Culture. We have been discussing what exactly the  
core should be for a base literacy, and we're trying to be more  
inclusive than exclusive This is complicated further by fact that new  
media is constantly changing. The Arts Department here has strong  
ties with many other departments on campus and has active  
collaborations with Architecture, Language, Literature &  
Communication,  Cognitive Science, and Biotechnology to name a few.  
Additionally, many students from other departments on campus come to  
our department looking for collaboration. The program has outreach to  
the local community with the iEAR lecture and performance series, and  
connections with WRPI and The Sanctuary for Independent Media. The  
graduate students are widely mixed group of different intentions and  
media; although they all use new media as part of their practice.

Aside from these, siggraph has an education committee that has been  
working on a curriculum. It is quite extensive, although it focuses  
almost primarily on computer graphics media solely. And, it looks  
almost exclusively at technique.

On continuation of Blanca's thoughts. My opinion of computer  
programming is that it's no harder than any other media. It's a  
learned skill as painting or sculpting is. I could see argument  
around the quality and accessibility of programming tools to artists  
and the lack usable feedback when writing code. I find that students  
who begin programming assume the computer knows what they want it to  
do, because the computer has always felt like an extension of their  
cognition. Whereas, we know that the computer must be told what to do  
in the finest of detail  covering any possibility. The combination of  
these two creates lots of frustration. The accustomed nature of on- 
demand results with the tedium of programming creates a tension. Yet,  
I believe that an artist must know their tools. The artist should not  
be absent from the creation of their own custom software.

One more point of perception. The computer's presence and  
ubiquitousness is very intoxicating. One device for web, phone,  
radio, tv, email, writing, messaging, gambling, gaming, and more. My  
concern is for students of new media who live this singular point of  
multi-connectedness. I find that level of attention and focus of  
"multi-tasking" students is low. The availability of internet access  
in the classroom is a blessing and a curse at the same time. Should  
curriculum look at addressing this?

I'm looking forward to reading more posts.

Best,
Shawn

-------------------------------------------------------
Shawn Lawson, Assistant Professor
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute
518-276-2206
http://www.crudeOils.us/shawn