Along with my colleague Jessica Schwarzenbach, I am engaged in research into the so called terminal degrees in fine art. Art education has always been somewhat controversial as evidenced in the UK where, some 40 years ago, there was much debate about the initiation of the bachelors degree and later the masters in fine art. At present in the UK, what in the US would be called the terminal degree in fine art is the PhD in fine art which incorporates a significant studio component and the dissertation methodology is the art practice itself. In the US however, the terminal degree is the MFA with PhDs being restricted to art historians and art theoreticians. As well as existing in the UK the fine art PhD can be undertaken across the globe. Over the past decade or so there have been some moves to establish the studio based PhD in fine art in colleges in the UD.
What do you think should be the terminal degree in fine art and why? Do you think this degree should be available in the US?
I have summarised from the first 5 pages of a Google Scholar search on "fine art" some directions for research in Fine Art. Any of these directions, and many more creative directions would be suitable for a PhD.
Fine Art:
aesthetics,
philosophy,
history,
art for therapy,
societal role,
pigment analysis,
chemical deterioration,
photography as a fine art,
curation.
The basic requirement for a PhD are the usual 2: the thesis must be an original and a significant contribution to our knowledge. Artifacts may be created and used as a source of data (evidence), but are not themselves marked.
This is interesting Ian and thank you for doing this. Do you think that the so called terminal degree in fine art should be specified and if so by whom and should this be an masters or doctorate? I'd be interested to hear your opinion.
Although I am not a "fine artist"!, I believe strongly that the ultimate degree should be the PhD. (Not a PhD, Fine Arts). Negotiate carefully with all bodies before taking on the first PhD candidate. (e.g. the The Royal Institute of ... and The American ... ) To get the accreditation process going, you will have to import the external examiners (who must have PhDs) from other faculties and countries. Start with a brilliant candidate who already has a Masters degree in Fine Arts from Emerson. Work out a plan for international co-operation and supervision during the candidature, so that there are no sad surprises. Worst case scenario: grant UK degrees in the US!
I am not specifically interested in granting PhDs at Emerson but with the whole concept of the PhD in fine arts as a possible degree for US artists. I am very interested to read your comments. I think that the quality of advisors for students, along with the substantial studio component are the 2 main issues.
Susan, what about in musicology? I happened to attend a convention in that subject at the University of Melbourne, and everyone seemed to respect their program and their final degree.
Susan, in what sense do you mean that pushing practice into instrumental directions is not "helpful"? Also, what academic reasons do you have for not going down the PhD route? If your reasons are that the dissertation may not be publishable could not this be remedied by advisors who assist students toward more publishable outcomes and writing?
Nelson, do you have any experience of the musicology or other arts based research degrees?
No, P. Hackett. I am entering musicology as self-educated. I did my Ph.D. in Hispanic Studies. In February I will have a book published on composer Manuel de Falla´s music in its relationship to Federico Garcia Lorca´s poetry. Also, I am writing another book on French composer Maurice Ravel and have discovered new documents pertinent to him.
Your work sounds fascinating Nelson. My interests are specifically with the visual fine arts. Do you think what byou do relates to this?
Absolutely. I have published studies in Spanish and English on "Depth Perception in the History of Painting: Ortega and Jaensch." See the article uploaded under my profile in Researchgate.
You are quite welcome, P. I can share with you the fact that many scholars with the Ph.D. in one of the languages and its culture often write on the relationships between letters and painting.
Fine arts is not my area in professional practice. I will share ideas in a general perspective. I agree that the terminal degree in fine art is PhD because of vertical trajectory and worldwide recognition for phd as the highest level of education entering the expert level. However I will look into the phd curriculum design for fine arts professionals, environment where the professional practice exist, interdisciplinary collaboration, and global market relevance.
Dear Paul, I am a Director of an AHRC funded Centre for Doctoral Training which attracts 60+ applications per years for our five funded places in PhD research. The majority of colleagues delivering this Programme have an MFA, being of that age that meant the MA or MFA was the terminal degree. Concurrently I have recently completed a term as an external examiner at the Glasgow School of Art MFA programme, and ongoing in a similar capacity in other Universities. The PhD and MFA communities are distinctive but with significant overlaps. Contact me on [email protected] if you'd like to correspond a bit more on this topic.
Isn't it a question of prestige and employability? In my experience most universities in the United States require an MFA or a Ph.D to even be considered for a position - unless you are famous enough as an artist to have the job thrown at you regardless of any academic training you may have. If you are not, the terminal degree (MFA or Ph.D in Studio) is only a kind of 'quality control' in the absence of other verifiable documentation.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Medicine
- Epi
- Age Groups
- Children