Hi Terry,
This is an interesting topic.
Traditionally, at least in my experience, practice based courses in art &
design have been taught with an approximate 75%- 25% distribution between
practice and history/theory/context. I have a few questions about your
'Pol Pot' approach.
1. You say:
"The evidence indicates that fields
develop more freely, rapidly and creatively
when freed from the conservatism of a culture
based primarily on their prior history."
Could you point me in the direction of some of that evidence? Does
ignorance of the history of your subject promote creativity?
2. You say:
"Theory offers benefits over history
because history provides only examples
and justified theory presents knowledge
and understanding that goes beyond using
exemplars."
Are you saying that 'history' or the teaching thereof is simply in the
form of a listing of examples? Is it not the case that history and theory
are interconnected?
3. You say:
"Š it appears that Design education would
be better if Design History was dropped
from its curricula."
It appears to whom Š you?
Very best wishes
Martin
Professor Martin Salisbury
Director, The Centre for Children's Book studies
Course Leader, MA Children's Book Illustration
Cambridge School of Art
0845 196 2351
http://www.anglia.ac.uk/ruskin/en/home/microsites/ccbs.html
|