At what point do we hold the schools accountable?

Become a member of the CGSociety

Connect, Share, and Learn with our Large Growing CG Art Community. It's Free!

THREAD CLOSED
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 02 February 2013   #31
I think you are mistaking "need" for "aren't".
 
Old 02 February 2013   #32
What's your point?

Mine is that government subsidies are in fact in many cases the path to the best possible economic outcomes.

(For example, it took massive investment into irrigation by the federal government to make the American Southwest inhabitable for large cities possible. I could keep going.)

But yeah, I don't want to get too off topic. So should governments not subsidize student loans in industries with a high market volume? Or should it only give subsidies to students seeking employment in such a field who have demonstrated tremendous potential?

Last edited by badsearcher : 02 February 2013 at 06:44 PM.
 
Old 02 February 2013   #33
You do not have to invent an economic condition to make an economically positive thing economically rewarding.

This is otherwise known as A equals A.
 
Old 02 February 2013   #34
Originally Posted by badsearcher: ...I start to suspect that at least one out of every ten 3d animators are faculty at a school, giving promises to aspiring 3d animators of exciting employment that they, by being teachers, are almost de facto proof that they can't fulfill. At what point do we, even just as taxpayers, have to demand the cycle be broken? I mean, how many people do you know who have said, "oh well, I'll try to get a master's so that I can always teach."?



Man that's offensive. As an ex college instructor I can say from experience almost every instructor I've worked with was with a big studio during the day and taught at night. There are only 1 or 2 schools that even offer a masters in 3D in the US in the first place. Secondly our attitudes towards school children in K-12 have a lot to do with the failures of our students in higher ed.

Lastly, huge multi billion dollar corporations own a lot of these art schools, good luck with *that* fight.

You want reform? Good luck. Your best bet is to pass a law stating that if a student is unable to find work out of school, that their loans be paid by the school for failing to prepare them. But that will NEVER HAPPEN.

You want to blame the instructors at level 13-17 for the failures of society and the schools from K-12. Sad.
 
Old 02 February 2013   #35
When were you a college instructor? I'm mainly singling out the colleges that I see advertising themselves (such as the ones that have banners on this website) and the fact that new degree mills keep sprouting up.

Edit: Oh I see what you mean when you say offensive. I didn't mean that all professors are incapable of actually achieving great things in their fields (and getting paid for them). I had the good fortune to have professors who were practicing artists. What I mean is that a lot of degree mills are being operated by people who are finding it much more profitable to take advantage of young peoples' naivete than to actually be practicing artists themselves.

"Secondly our attitudes towards school children in K-12 have a lot to do with the failures of our students in higher ed."

Not that I'm disagreeing with you, but how do you mean?

Last edited by badsearcher : 02 February 2013 at 07:13 PM.
 
Old 02 February 2013   #36
I apologize. I agree with a lot of the problems you've listed, and it's a sore point for me. I taught college for about 10 years and it's a rough issue for me for the reasons you've listed. I obviously am incapable of having an objective pov, so I'll remove myself.

Apologies for my attitude there. I'll leave the post because I don't believe in editting out stupid things I've said or done. Thanks for your patience.

Vox
 
Old 02 February 2013   #37
NO! Please, share your perspective, this issue affects you as well and it's not about being objective but it's about giving your opinion. One of the things I'm really enjoying seeing here are the wide range of opinions. And yes, I feel you have a right to be upset because of the stereotype of, "those who can't do, teach." It's complete nonsense, solid teaching is one of the highest functions that human beings do for each other.

I only started this thread to open a conversation about how to economically and culturally respond to the growing number of degree mills. I don't have anything innately against teaching as a profession.

Last edited by badsearcher : 02 February 2013 at 07:46 PM.
 
Old 02 February 2013   #38
This is a problem with the for-profit school system and it affects far more industries than VFX.

When I started there were literally no schools offering degrees in 3D animation or anything related. People working in the industry were CS majors, or film majors, or traditional art majors. Those that made the jump to 3D animation and VFX were all self taught and had the benefit of all the knowledge and experience gained from starting off in other disciplines.

The new breed of digital artists being pumped out by these new for-profit (and even some legit non-profit) schools have knowledge of how to operate the software but lack the well rounded educations that a lot of the pioneers in this industry bought to the table. They lack the problem solving skills and ability to innovate that was a prerequisite to succeeding in this industry 10-20 years ago and instead are overly affected by the limitations imposed by the software.

In no way am I saying that all people coming out of these schools are like this. As always there are many phenomenal artists and problem solvers entering this industry every day from these schools, but they are being watered down with dozens more "button pushers" who know how to operate the tools but don't know how to innovate new solutions beyond the tool's limitations. Those of you that went to some of these schools, think about some of your classmates and tell me this isn't true about a lot of them.

There was a time when there were a handful of art schools that were very selective and studios recruited and competed for graduates of these programs very hard. Now with the recent explosion of for-profit schools flooding the market with artists who probably aren't qualified to be working in this industry coupled with a lack of accreditation and standards to differentiate the truly great artists from the button pushers, it has made the hiring process much more difficult.

As always, the quality of the demo reel is paramount, but all other things being equal I would hire someone who has a degree from a university or no degree at all before hiring someone from one of these diploma mills. At least then I know I have hired an artist that has the drive and initiative to teach him/herself the necessary skills, who has the benefit of a well rounded education and/or life experiences, and who wasn't just taught how to use the software but has learned how to learn. In my experience, those are the most valuable people on your team.
 
Old 02 February 2013   #39
Originally Posted by mingbling: Those of you that went to some of these schools, think about some of your classmates and tell me this isn't true about a lot of them.


*shudders* There was especially one, who used all pre-made materials in their bachelor's thesis, very rudimentary animation as well, it makes me want to ask them what they even have to offer. I doubt that person will find work. I wish for the sake of my own degree that my alma mater didn't consider their work passable.
 
Old 02 February 2013   #40
Originally Posted by RobertoOrtiz: What I think is that is a a glut of junky programs that have dilluted the waters.


Roberto, I think you know from previous posts about the various schools, that it's not the junky programs that at the real core of this. It's the way banks and schools and governments have collaborated and structured the loans that effectively see and treat students as nothing more than low grade junk bonds.
 
Old 02 February 2013   #41
I appreciate your candor. I'll comment on some of my thoughts about what is happening in education.

I think as a society we excel at moving the goalposts. In the US (at least) ignorance is viewed as some sort of virtue, and the more ignorant the person the most they dig in their heels and embrace the confirmation bias inherent in us all. We are teaching our kids to accept mediocrity as success, and overall it has some negative effects on us all. (Ever heard of Orly Taitz?... good lord.)

If ignorance is celebrated, if mediocrity is rewarded, are we teaching our kids the right lessons? Is it already too late to change once they are 18 years old and set in their ways? I don't know. It would seem that being totally set in your ways doesn't happen for many until early 50s, but again it's hard to say. I believe it's societies failings that are producing this. And for the most part it comes down to money.

Schools in the US are funded largely by property tax. This is one reason why inner city schools are so bad. Lots of renters, less property tax. As our financial situations melt down, we find the citizenry less inclined to want to pay property taxes, and so we must make tests easier, doctor results, teach the test instead of the concepts all because of the lack of flowing green paper. This is just one of many symptoms.

Follow the money. There you will find the root cause. I find it odd that with the widespread adoption of the internet we are seeing this happen. Is it coincidental? I don't know. But I strongly feel that the problem is institutionalized and starts very early. We are just seeing the end result.

I'm all over the place here because it's hard to form anything coherent in a short space on such a wide reaching topic, but from what I've seen this is the result of 30 years of failed educational policy. But what I am discovering is that it's only considered a failure by some, and by others it's obvious that it's intended.
 
Old 02 February 2013   #42
Originally Posted by cojam: Roberto, I think you know from previous posts about the various schools, that it's not the junky programs that at the real core of this. It's the way banks and schools and governments have collaborated and structured the loans that effectively see and treat students as nothing more than low grade junk bonds.


Oh yeah.

I have posted a lot over the education forums about the scam these schools are running.

There is a FANTASTIC documentary about this called
College inc from the PBS tv show Frontline:

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/front...AwAABwAAAML4CwA=
__________________
LW FREE MODELS:FOR REAL Home Anatomy Thread
FXWARS
:Daily Sketch Forum:HCR Modeling
This message does not reflect the opinions of the US Government

 
Old 02 February 2013   #43
Originally Posted by Allen1: However, the young are impressionable.....


That's the nail on the head. Before anyone else posts more of "people need to take responsibility for their choices" etc., just remember that 18 years olds need guidance because they are still teens and really have no idea that the career they want actually generates enough jobs for them to have a chance of getting in, even with top grades from college.
The last year in school (pre-college) is where we all have to make the decision, and truth is we just don't know the reality. The teachers or better still the people who trawl for colleges should at least tip us off about whether our chosen career has been obsoleted by technology or the labour pool overflowing with people looking to get a start.
To be honest, I never would have known how hard it was to get a job in CG if I hadn't been reading this forum for the last year or so.
__________________
I like to learn.
 
Old 02 February 2013   #44
Quote: The fact that this thread even exists is evidence to the contrary.


The fact that I go to work everyday in an art department filled with BA and Master's educated artists and designers, (all of whom are under 40) where most of them have already paid off their student loans and some of whom have even paid off their houses is evidence that you might not have quite the grasp of this that you think you have.

Your point about subsidies is naive at best. First, there are art schools that do not receive anything at all from the gov't, and second, there are things that are beneficial to the economy and still get subsidies all the time - right along with things that aren't. Mind you, I'm not saying to anyone "Yes definitely go to school". I'm just saying that it shouldn't be automatically ruled out either.

Quote: There was a time when there were a handful of art schools that were very selective and studios recruited and competed for graduates of these programs very hard. Now with the recent explosion of for-profit schools flooding the market with artists who probably aren't qualified to be working in this industry coupled with a lack of accreditation and standards to differentiate the truly great artists from the button pushers, it has made the hiring process much more difficult.


Honestly, it's not really even fair to single out "for-profit" schools anymore. Unless you're looking at something like the medical field, nearly ALL colleges have lowered their standards and are accepting more and more students every year to all sorts of programs. I work along side a lot of engineers and they often complain about a similar glut of less-than qualified job applicants. I can also tell you that a lot of the "legit-non profit" schools that get brought up on this board as being "solid schools" (some of whom have actually been mentioned in this very thread) are every bit as guilty of this as some of the bad "for-profits". At this point imo there's not really even a line anymore between the two. There really are good and bad schools on both sides of the fence. The only difference is in how they make their profit. At least in the U.S. anyway.

Also, this isn't directed at you personally so much as it is to everyone on the board, but I would be VERY careful about singing the praises of places you've only ever heard about and haven't been to or attended.

Quote: "Secondly our attitudes towards school children in K-12 have a lot to do with the failures of our students in higher ed."

Not that I'm disagreeing with you, but how do you mean?


x24BitVoxel already answered that from his perspective, but I'd like to actually add to it because I couldn't agree more! This gets away a little from CG but I think it's still very relevant to the topic at hand. I coached lacrosse at public schools for almost ten years from the late '90s to the mid 2000s. I was the head coach at different times for the boys 6-8 grade team as well as the highschool JV (9th grade) and Varsity (10th-12th).

I eventually quite coaching because the parents stopped wanting coaches. They just wanted an after school babysitter. It got a little worse every year until my last year. At the middle school level I didn't hold try-outs. My rule each year was "show up, work hard in practice, have a good attitude, no drugs/alcohol, and keep your grades up. That's it. One year about mid way through the season I did a report card check and found out nearly the entire team had straight D's and F's. What's worse is that when I questioned them they all said "we tried our best and that's what counts." they were actually being fed this garbage in school. Trying your best is important, but accepting consistent, abysmal failure because you "tried your best" is NOT a recipe for success. I forfeited our next game and our next week of practices and told them all to bring their grades up. I was told by every other coach I knew that this was suicide but I thought for sure that the parents would be behind me. Surprise of surprises, the parents tried to fire me. The actual words on the complaint were something like "...for telling our children their best isn't always good enough and instilling a defeatist attitude and damaging their self-esteem". The only reason I kept the job through the rest of the season is because they couldn't find a replacement. This type of thing has only become more and more common in a lot of American public schools and I think the mind-set it creates in kids is a large part of why so many fail after college. If the foundation is bad, the rest of the structure doesn't stand much of a chance.

Edited for the irony of typos in a post about education. lol

Last edited by Crotalis : 02 February 2013 at 10:15 PM.
 
Old 02 February 2013   #45
Originally Posted by badsearcher: As taxpayers, should we continue to subsidize schools that have a likely low rate of return for the economy? Let's look at it in that way, shall we?


as a tax payer, my main concern is that I live in a nation of educated people...I don't care how much these courses are "putting back into the economy" because regardless of which field these people end up in after graduating, they're still goin to be contributing to the economy.

your reasoning is flawed.
 
Thread Closed share thread



Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
CGSociety
Society of Digital Artists
www.cgsociety.org

Powered by vBulletin
Copyright 2000 - 2006,
Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Minimize Ads
Forum Jump
Miscellaneous

All times are GMT. The time now is 09:47 AM.


Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.