Futuro de la Industria del Maíz del Cusco

5.3.8.

This was contentious for many of the subjects who provided a good deal of data on the issue. Powell (D, 2017) believed “people who can draw… you to see more of them from

colleges and universities abroad than in the UK.” Roycroft (2017) maintained that “a lot of the Universities do not teach people how to sketch.” Witts (2017) believed education was

neglecting sketching: students “have not been schooled in what good sketching is all about,” describing them, “trying to move forward with the brakes on and they don't know why” In such situations, he believed, “you don't know what you don't know,” so individuals trying to remedy their lack of skill would find it almost impossible to do so.

Disparity between institutions was referred to by subjects, the attitude towards, and tuition of sketching varying hugely. Powell, (D, 2017) suggested the attitude of a single tutor could impact an entire institution’s approach: “certain colleges often produce

students who are good at this because they’ve had a tutor there who thinks it’s important.” He

added, “if you have a tutor who can draw, they will talk to you about how important drawing

is, and if they don’t, they’ll say it’s not important.” Witts (2017) felt institutions were

responsible for failing students: “I don't believe the quality of students has deteriorated in

anyway whatsoever - it's the course that's not right.”

Among those subjects with involvement in higher education, the syllabus of courses was of concern. Phillips, (2017) maintained courses didn’t listen to industry. He described a commonality among institutions: “a drawing phase in the first year,” but felt this was inadequate, suggesting, “they want to build on that or maybe go for a few more

weeks, just to try and get sketching back into the skill set.” Vessey (2017) observed

institutions paying lip-service to the skill: “it needs to go up a level in the syllabus… it's a

really important part of the module,” suggesting it should be, “well-structured and more meaningful… and not just doing for sake of doing it.”

Witts (2017) referred to his own experience of college to illustrate how attitudes towards sketching had shifted: “the number one message was draw: draw, draw, draw and

169 boy did we turn out to be different after that very green kind of rookie first period in the opening few weeks, months.” He recounted an example of an inspiring tutor: “Alan Padgett… at Central St. Martins… he said, ‘if you are awake you should have a pen in your hand, you should just be drawing all of the time.’” He also observed that, historically, within

institutions, “the principals, they could all draw, they came through Art School… prior to the

‘80s, when you absolutely had to be able to put things down on paper.” He maintained that

since then, “a change has gone on, unquestionably.”

Vessey (2017) observed: “there don't seem to be classes where they bring someone in to teach

… perhaps they will have to find their own way of doing it but I just couldn't believe that wouldn't be an important part of the module.” Witts (2017) described how students were

devoid of a “good lecturer… able to… step in and encourage and nudge the process or open it

up where it might have got blocked.” Powell (D, 2017) described how motivated students

could take responsibility for their skill shortfall: “YouTube videos… will teach you stuff

and make you better and quicker… the more you do it the better you get.”

The recruitment of students onto design courses was discussed. Witts (2017) referred to the decline in sketching standard since his time in HE, stating, “most of us that turned up

at Central (St Martins) were actually pretty good.” Vessey (2017) echoed this, bemoaning a

decline in rigour during recruitment: “it just doesn't seem to be as critical now in terms of

how universities recruit students. I don't know if they even have interviews now…when there are so many students… it's impossible.”

Phillips (2017) described the university sector as big business: “their primary objective is

to get kids on the seats paying nine grand a year.” He illustrated a worrying trend with

ramifications for students and industry alike: “you have got to recruit… the easiest way to

do that is generate more courses, and try and get bums on seats… I don't know whether that course-generating idea is actually based on what industry wants or whether it's just a case of going, ‘well, hang on, we can do that because it's a bit of this and a bit of that,” resulting in

the development of “pseudo design courses” with little value. He referred to a particular institution he had taught at where the majority of students were international, funded

170

by their wealthy parents, “what struck me it was… its heart and soul had been lost really,

just sold out - they needed the money.”

Cohort size was also of significance. Vessey (2017) maintained that, “when you have a

hundred students, there are always going to be a handful that stand out,” however, weak

students “struggle because of the sizes of the classes.” He reflected upon sketch work produced by a cohort of a hundred students: “it feels like they're just going through the

motions… they've ticked the box and they can move on.”