Specific elements of established pedagogical models, largely inherited from modernism, conflict directly with the nature of contemporary artistic thinking. The tension arises from models designed to produce autonomous, medium-specific objects, whereas contemporary practice is often post-medium, research-based, and context-dependent.


Point of Conflict Established Pedagogical Element Contemporary Artistic Thinking
1. Skill vs. Concept The curriculum prioritizes sequential, medium-specific skill acquisition as a prerequisite for artistic expression. Conceptual and material concerns are often co-dependent. The medium is not always subordinate to a pre-existing concept, rather, concepts can emerge from the process of making and material investigation.
2. Specialization vs. Interdisciplinarity Institutional structures are siloed by department (Painting, Sculpture), enforcing specialization. Practice is inherently interdisciplinary, combining diverse media and methods within a single project.
3. Object vs. System Assessment centers on the (often formal) critique of a finished, autonomous object treated as a self-contained entity. Practice has expanded to include non-object-based forms like systems and social platforms. Even when objects are produced, their meaning is often derived from their context and network, aspects which formalist critique is ill-equipped to analyze.
4. Authorship vs. Collaboration The framework is built around the individual artist, focusing on unique style and originality, with individual assessment. The notion of a single author is frequently critiqued through appropriation or generative methods.
5. Studio vs. Context The studio is treated as the primary and most legitimate site of artistic production. Practice is "post-studio," taking place in archives, labs, online, or within communities as dictated by the project's needs.