the classroom and personal aesthetics

The Classroom

The classroom sits dry and quiet, where a usually casual atmosphere is now rigid and tense. The occasional shuffling of feet can be heard as the students fidget in place. 

The collective anxiety of the room can be felt by the professor, yet he dismisses it. The real world is harsh, the students must learn so themselves. It is my responsibility to do so. He thinks to himself in a self-asserting manner.

It is critique day in the Two Dimensional Design class.

Professor Rush, who has been teaching for 33 years now, is considered essential to the curriculum at his university. Many of his peers view him as “the one who wrangles in students,” his pedagogy revolves around tough love and harsh criticism, but inside he feels that he truly deeply cares about the students he teaches.

It is not uncommon to hear tales of happenings from his classroom, students do love to gossip after all. 

“Professor Rush was talking to Sarah about her use of the grid, and he was getting pretty livid, he started yelling pretty loud and Sarah left the classroom crying.” says Jenny at lunch to her fellow peers. 

Interestingly enough, these stories, although usually horrible sounding for the student within, are always viewed with a level of “Well, that’s just how he is.” as a resignation to this method of teaching. 

Some may have personal issues with it, but it gets results.

“I honestly feel that if I hadn’t had Rush early on, I wouldn’t have gotten my shit together as an artist” Violet says leaning back into the uncomfortable cafeteria chair, “I was the best in the art department at my high school, so he gave me a dose of reality. I would have been an egomaniac if not for him!”

Something students always felt they took away from his class was a recognition for the arts. Professor Rush was quite adamant about what was art and what was not. He enforced rigid definitions of “good” and “bad” in his classroom. A slightly off skew line or perspective would be cause for beratement in front of the rest of the class.

Traditional art was the cream of the crop in the Professor's eyes, he quite regularly talked down on digital arts and abstract forms of creation. He would often call out Graphic Design and Animation majors for even daring to take him, claiming they would be better off with different, more “sensitive” professors.

What was art and what was not? It seemed Rush had a very clear answer, and that to question him was absurd.

It is no surprise that many had ended up dropping out towards the end of the first project. Many left the class crying and never returned over the years. If the project a student created was wrong in his eyes, they would have to redo it until it was right, sometimes upwards of 10 times. The workload was strict, after all it wasn’t Professor Rush's problem that the students were taking 18 credits of classes. 

Rather than adjust his curriculum, the professor instead chose to blame the students who left for not being strong enough.

“I remember that after Sarah dropped out, Rush made fun of her for not being able to handle it. He said she’d never make it in the real world!” Said Maurice to another student sitting at the study table.

Professor Rush believed students should be grateful to even earn a B in his class, as almost nobody ever gets an A. He believed in standard grade deviation with students, enforcing the meritocracy of ability over improvement in the classroom setting.

Only so many could be graded high, and just as many must be graded low. The scales must balance. It was only natural.

It seemed that, even those who were often mistreated or bullied by Professor Rush's words, the class often found themselves viewing the class as a necessary step in their career. Rush knew his stuff, and although he was often apathetic and intolerant to the students' conditions outside of the classroom, he was just showing them a slice of the real world.

Personal Aesthetics

At this point you may have wondered why I am telling you this story, or why I have decided to create this fictional professor at all. Except that I have not created a fictional professor, but instead told the story of a real tenured professor I have encountered in my educational journey. Only with randomized names for privacy sake, of course.

“Professor Rush”, in my opinion, operates a pedagogy that is not only damaging to the students who take him, but also to the educational institution as a whole. A professor once told me that there is no such thing as bad pedagogy, but instead just differences in teaching styles, as no one teacher is the same.

I can’t help but disagree, specifically when I think of Professor Rush. The apathetic approach to the students of the classroom creates a disengaged learning environment where students are taught the wrong lessons.

Being one of the first professors ran into by an incoming student in the arts, students are met with a crushing template which breeds a rigid conformity into what they view as essential for “good work.” 

Masked as “teaching the students the real world” the professor crushes and squeezes students out of every last drop of creativity and individuality in favor of reproducing artistic machines. Those who create only to please the professor who claims unwavering authority over them.

Overloaded in work and removed of any creative choice, the students suffer through an extremely dense syllabus of black and white, lifeless work. They emerge into many branching art programs ranging from painting to graphic design already molded into the template, the rest that comes after is simply a continuation of the process. This barcode is transplanted into the DNA of each artist early.

This method of teaching also reinforces Paolo Frieres “Banking model of education,” as Professor Rush views each student as an empty or hollow shell that must be filled with information. There is no room for the student to offer their own suggestions or feedback. They must not speak out against the master of the classroom. Education is no longer a practice of freedom.

This damage is so small and yet so overwhelming, students now understand that to enter the classroom environment is to please “The Master”. To look towards the professor and create what is wished for, not what could be their own creative identity.

The classroom is now dictated by personal aesthetics.