First Meeting:

Brenda Varda provided a comprehensive outline of pertinent Issues and questions about literacy skills at Art Center, which we will continue to draw from at our next meeting, I will post this outline onlineASAP.

Critique was raised as a shared structure in humanities and studio courses. Think about it as a bridge between studio and humanities.

Question: What is the current curriculum? How do we find out? A complicated question—it can’t be done by looking at the course titles. One proposal is to e-mail Department Chairs with a few questions about the current goals of their existing curriculum.

Tasks-

–Identify where HDS content is working in current studio classes, and how studio models work in current HDS classes.  Identify and contact faculty who work in both fields. Ask students to identify classes which they feel offer models of both at work.

–Contact alumni and industry to ask what literacy skills they need the most from the standpoint of the market.(Note—this is not at all to suggest that these market demands are the only criteria for building an integrated Humanities, Art and Design Curriculum—but it is an important set of skills to be addressed, considering the demand for web presence which includes both visual and written information.)

–Read the WASC assessment.

– Contact outside institutions that offer new models.

(Stanford, MIT, more to be added at our next meeting.)

Next Meeting: February 26th, 11:00, in the cafeteria (student side.)

An added thought for our next meeting– Research model and laboratory as shared between science and studio. Can we get in a Science faculty member to talk about opportunities for science and research to cross-over with studio, and identify where this is already happening?

Also, keep our eye on defining GOALS rather than exact structures to get there.