Higher arts education should be university education.

Speech from Eva Kosa / Austria, Held on Sierre Art Universities Symposia 1999 /Switzerland

We are engaged in problems of higher arts education, in new learning cultures and research concepts, contents and curricula, educational and organisational structures and standards in an international context. Dealing with these we differentiate between two different points of view: 1. What does art need? 2. What does art need? Although the two questions seem to be just one they stand for different approaches and priorities: Number one refers strongly to the artistic profession, which means to art as a professional field in a rapidly changing and developing information-, communication- and knowledge society. But more than that also to the dynamic field of cultural production in a wider sense and to the qualifications, the knowledge and skills which are needed there. In other words: What kind of education should arts institutions offer to young people to give them the best possible preparation for their future professional lives? What kind of competence do artists need as cultural professionals to be able to participate adequately in the international cultural process? How can it be generated? How should the learning process be designed and organised? Which contents are necessary, which are useful, etc.? The second question concerns the relation between arts institutions, the sphere of professional cultural (knowledge) production on the one hand and society on the other. It reflects the way professional artistic competence is constituting itself within the contemporary social context and the question if society is sufficiently aware of this competence and its cultural importance. It addresses the question if and how artistic cultural competence should be integrated more with other parts of the educational system and other areas of social relevant knowledge. Is there really enough leeway and support for the development of this competence? For instance: How long will it take until art and design will be recognised research disciplines? And more than that: what kind of position and preconditions within the educational system do arts institutions need to fulfil their tasks and functions as producers of relevant cultural knowledge?

In this reflections we consider three points as relevant above all: 1. The aim of education is knowledge. The owner of the knowledge is the learner, because it is always the result of his or her own, individual learning process. A person can therefor decide on how and what he or she wants to learn and on the use he or she wants to make of the knowledge. In general it should make him or her more self-confident, orientated, competent and independent, but as well curious, interested in and capable of further learning and knowledge production. Education, and also art education always should widen horizons. That means it should widen and increase the professional and personal options of a person. It never shall narrow them to a specific given field or to somebody elses interests or believes. First of all

M O D E 2 / Document1 / 17/10/2012 23:56:00

knowledge shall benefit its owner and he or she must be able to assess this benefit. These are our criteria for meaningful, qualitative education. 2. Art can be learned. (Higher) art education is explicitly not practical training - at least much more than that. This also means that the predominance of practical instruction, of practice-oriented aesthetic and technical knowledge in art education is obsolete. The use and importance of critical and intellectual elements as well as research competences are increasing. Art education is explicitly not different from all other education. The sources of knowledge in the arts can and must be questioned. The knowledge in the arts and the arts themselves thus can be developed. The arts should not be colonialised by other knowledge producing disciplines as sociology, philosophy, cultural studies in general or the sciences. Although these are important and should be considered in art education the arts also depend on their own specific theoretical as well as practical knowledge. Therefor artists need education and the arts need research. Knowledge about the arts and in the arts is social relevant. This knowledge can also be useful and important in other contexts. It is necessary that artistic research constitutes (also) in an academic environment. Above that it is necessary that researchers in art and design get linked to an international research community, which is already emerging and developing. 3. A precondition of all these considerations of course is our conviction that the European universities are not just oldfashioned, antiquated, inefficient ocean steamers but that they will have to play a crucial role within our societies. Universities are not the same as art academies. Art academies are small exclusive institutions - exclusive in a double sense: elitist and outside. They are a historical relict. Of course also the universities sometimes are relicts. They still have to change a lot to meet the needs and challenges of contemporary society. But contrary to the art academies they still have big influence and they are of great social importance. There is no real alternative to these institutions. Therefor we are convinced that the universities will find ways to change and adapt and that art education should be involved in these changes and therefor be integrated in the university system. (I also have to mention that some very openminded art academies - in Northern Europe - already have taken the opportunity to rebuild themselves successfully into small modern universities. They can be regarded and may serve as models of good practice for others.) To illustrate what we are talking of when we use the term university I finally want to quote out of the conclusions and recommendations of working group nr. 3 The learning art university at the EU-conference Higher arts education: the cultural process and the world of work which I had the honour to organise in the summer of 1998 on occasion of the Austrian EU-presidency in the name of the Austrian ministry of higher education and research: 1. We insist in the centrality of the university as a basic institution for a civil society. "Culture" should not bypass social problems, but must open leeways for the universities in order to make them receptive to these problems.

M O D E 2 / Document1 / 17/10/2012 23:56:00

2. A new learning culture will have consequences for the universities: It requires learning organisations with a high degree of permeability and autonomy Receptiveness to the changing environment is necessary for adapting a self-governing learning process All tasks of the institutions - teaching, learning, research, leadership, management, service, etc. - require an integration into this concept. The continuous "organic" development of the institution should be followed by a permanent adaption of intervention, e.g. legislation, by external stakeholders. Political borders will no longer maintain their imperative function within national systems. Local, regional and even supranational elements will be part of new networks. This will be formative for "scientific and cultural" landscapes in a permanent interrelation with their social and economic environment. This will necessarily embrace the "Candidate Countries" as well as those democracies which comply with academic freedom.

M O D E 2 / Document1 / 17/10/2012 23:56:00

(German Translation)

1. Was braucht die Kunst? Was fehlt in der knstlerischen Hochschulbildung aus professioneller Sicht? Sind gewisse traditionelle Inhalte und Sozialisationsweisen inzwischen falsch? Welches wren dann Neue, Richtige? Welches Wissen, welche Fhigkeiten brauchen junge Knstlerinnen und Knstler nicht nur im Hinblick auf eine gegenwrtige und mgliche zuknftige Kunstpraxis, sondern auch im Hinblick darauf, dass sie als Kulturschaffende darber hinaus sozial und konomisch angemessen bestehen knnen? Welche Kenntnisse und Methoden bentigen sie um ihre eigene Position in der Kunst, in der Kultur, in der Gesellschaft und ihre Beziehung zu anderen gesellschaftlichen Subsystemen zu bestimmen? Wie weit mu man den Kunstbegriff bereits in der Ausbildung fassen um einem sehr dynamischen und zunehmend entgrenzten

professionellen Feld - Stichworte dazu: Kulturindustrie, Mikroindustrien, Kulturwirtschaft - fr Knstlerinnen und Knstler gerecht zu werden? Okwui Enwezor, Kurator der nchsten dokumenta XI im Jahr 2002 in Kassel und Grnder des Magazins Nka - Journal for Contemporary African Art uerte sich in einem Interview mit der sterreichischen Zeitung Der Standard (Ich habe nichts zu verkaufen vom 28. September 99) auf die Frage: An einer sthetik-Debatte sind Sie nicht interessiert? wie folgt: Das ist nicht meine Ausbildung, Kunst sthetisch zu definieren. Ich komme aus einer Tradition, in der sthetik nicht getrennt von Politik oder konomie stehen kann. (...) Ich spreche lieber von Kultur als von Kunst, weil der Begriff Kunst lngst vom Markt besetzt ist. Kultur bietet komplexere Mglichkeiten des Erfassens., und weiter: Wir mssen jeden orthodoxen Ansatz loswerden, der vorgibt, unter welchen Bedingungen Kunst entstehen und von Wert sein kann. Was bedeuten derartige Aussagen fr die Verfasstheit von Kunststudien? Die Anforderungen an Vernderungsbereitschaft und Wandlungsfhigkeit der betroffenen Institutionen scheinen enorm. Allein aus dieser Perspektive heraus mssen die Kunsthochschulen sich heute neu grnden.

2. Was braucht die Kunst? Ausgehend von den obenstehenden Fragen, die wir mit vielen anderen teilen, kamen wir aber sehr bald auf eine zustzliche und noch grundlegendere Frage, die uns vor allem anderen entscheidend schien, nmlich in welchem Kontext soll sich eine solche Neugrndung vollziehen? Die Frage in welchem Verhltnis Kunsthochschulen zur professionellen Kunstsphre stehen hat ja zugleich auch schon die Frage aufgeworfen, in welchem Verhltnis sie darber hinaus zur Gesellschaft stehen, und das hngt urschlich damit zusammen in welchem Verhltnis die artistic community - was auch immer darunter verstanden werden mag - zur Gesellschaft steht bzw. wie die Gesellschaft zur Kunst steht. Anlsslich der Salzburger Konferenz Knstlerische Hochschulbildung: Kulturprozess und Arbeitswelt stellte die Arbeitsgruppe, die sich mit dem Thema der Gesellschaftsrelevanz knstlerischer Hochschulen

M O D E 2 / Document1 / 17/10/2012 23:56:00

und Universitten beschftigte fest, dass aktuelle und gegenwartsbezogene kulturelle uerungen hufig als etwas erscheinen, das auerhalb der Gesellschaft, des gesellschaftlich akzeptierten und etablierten Bereichs steht. Die beteiligten ExpertInnen empfahlen

darberhinaus, dass Anstrengungen unternommen werden sollten, mehr Wissen ber und Verstndnis fr die gesellschaftliche und soziale Rolle von Knstlern und Knstlerinnen zu erzeugen, zu transportieren und zu vermitteln. Auch die Politik, die ja besonders in Europa zumeist Kunst, Kultur und kulturelle Bildung erhlt und diese Ausgaben verantworten und rechtfertigen mu, ist hier gefordert, auf eine Steigerung der Fhigkeit der Gesellschaft, Kunst, bzw. entsprechende kulturelle Prozesse und Gestaltungen zu verstehen, hinzuwirken. Aus unserer Sicht bedeutet das, dass sich knstlerische Bildung im gesellschaftlichen Kontext definieren mu. Im gesellschaftlichen Kontext, das bedeutet heute weiters im Kontext einer globalen, multikulturellen Wissens- und Kommunikationsgesellschaft. In einer solchen Umwelt ist es wesentlich, dass knstlerische Bildung nicht mehr als Sonderfall behandelt wird. Es ist wesentlich, anzuerkennen dass auch Kunst, wie andere Professionen, wissensbasiert ist und in Wechselwirkung und Austausch zu anderen wissensbasierten, wissensproduzierenden Disziplinen steht bzw. stehen sollte. Dafr sind die Voraussetzungen zu schaffen bzw. die Bedingungen zu optimieren.

M O D E 2 / Document1 / 17/10/2012 23:56:00