Do you not have workshops where students can be guided on software issues by technicians.
I am retired 15 years now, and things have probably changed, but I know one of our technicians moved on to Huddersfield uni in that role.
Nope. We don't want to limit anyone to one piece of software. If an undergraduate can't be arsed going onto You Tube and learning how to use Lightroom.... which is really, really easy to use, then it's a pretty poor show. They're all pretty much the same: ACR, Lightroom, Capture One... if you can use one, you can use any of them with equal facility. We spend time, instead, teaching them how to get QUALITY from the files REGARDLESS of which software they use, as ultimately, that's what matters. Same deal for all of them anyway... applying lens profiles, removing CA.. good sharpening and NR techniques, colour profiling etc. These are universal things regardless of software, and we tend to just use Adobe Camera Raw for that, as it's something pretty much all students have access too.
What I do not understand, is how any one can get on to a photographic degree course and not know such things.
It was some thing that brought me to tears on my birthday as a ten year old with my first adjustable camera. By the next day I had fallen in, and was processing my first film.
Kids today don't have hobbies - they aren't used to learning, and when they meet Higher Education head on, they can't cope. They've been carried and spoon fed through school and FE. Also, you can't actually fail a BTEC course very easily.. you can just keep re-submitting work over and over again until it reaches a grade. By that time, you've learned how to pass that module by rote, not how to be a photographer. FE photography is broken. Those that are good from FE courses would be good any way, whether they did the BTEC or not. I'm not joking: I have triple distinction students from BTEC curses who can't use a camera properly, or couldn't answer a simple question like, "If I set a lens to f8, and opened up the aperture 2 stops, what f stop would I be on?" . Another question I always ask is "What do you read about photography?" and hardly any do.
I am well aware of the difference between education and training, but there is now a big However... Now that students are faced with a massive bill at the end of their degree they are faced with the reality of having to monetize what they have learnt.
Unfortunately there is a big gap between what they can offer, and their own and prospective employers expectations.
It's the photographic industry Terry.. there are no "jobs"
Who are these employees you are referring to? In the photography industry, you freelance. No photography graduate expects to get a "job". What they expect is to leave with the skills that help them promote themselves, and market themselves, and network, and fine ways to raise their profile... get exhibited, and published. That's what counts. There are no "jobs". It's not like a science degree where you can walk into a job as a graduate. We have a very proven track record of graduates actually getting out there and making it... but it wasn't because we offered any "employment" opportunities, as none exist.
The distinction between education and training, at least as far as expectations are concerned are necessarily becoming blurred.
That Distinction is becoming closer to that required of a Doctor, engineer or architect, where work skills are not only expected but demanded.
Demanded by whom? I'm sorry Terry, but there's absolutely no parallel between doctor/engineer/architect and a photography graduate.
We all enter and work as photographers because we have no other choice It is something in our DNA, It is certainly not because it is easy or highly lucrative. A majority of new young Photographers are forced out of the profession in their early years, because the rewards do not match their financial needs. I was one of the more fortunate ones.
Then they were misled somewhere along the way about what they can expect. Our graduates are left in no doubt whatsoever. We tell them from word go that they've entered a massively competitive arena, where only the best survive. If there are graduates out there who think they'll be waking into jobs and earning decent money from the get go, they've been hugely, and cruelly misled.
For many years Education has been a business. This was felt first by the FE colleges who by their nature have no supporting research funding. They have to rely entirely on their funding councils current structure.
Virtually every management meeting relates to subjects like, retention, supported teaching hours, budgets, accommodation strategy and the like . Bums on seats and completion rates make the difference between meeting your budget or failure.
It is not surprising that final results show little relationship to student ability, especially at the bottom end.
Terry... you really think I need this explaining? This is the reality, yes... but not my studios, classrooms and lecture theatres it's not. When I'm wit my students, managers can go take a running jump. They can **** up education as much as they want (managers very rarely actually know anything about higher education) but in MY classes, and MY lectures, MY word is what goes, and the minute a manager tries to interfere with what I teach is the day I hand in my notice, and just go back to earning a living as a photographer... which is crossing my mind more and more lately as they try and force more and more FE inspired bullsh1t into higher education.
I was inevitable that HE had to enter this world
Not on my watch.
,This has already proved exceedingly difficult for HE departments established in FE colleges.
Yet there's one thing they can't stop, change, or have any interference with, and that's what I actually do with my students in the classroom. All they're doing is making it harder to actually find talented photographers because FE is simply incapable of producing them.
