<p>I was wondering how people decide whether to go to an art school or a university for art? I want to major in advertising/graphic design and was only interested in looking at university programs but now I'm a little unsure. A university would offer me more flexibility if I changed my mind in the future, but I feel an art school might give me better connections to employers and such. How did you decide and are you happy with your decision?</p>
<p>Choosing between an art school or a normal university usually comes down to what college environment you are looking for. Each has its own pros and cons.</p>
<p>Normal university environment:</p>
<p>Good:
Diverse array of majors (biology, history, etc.)
Workload is usually 50% major and 50% liberal arts courses
Ability to pursue other interests ( minoring in something like Political Science or changing your major)</p>
<p>Bad:
Can have weaker foundation/ art programs or less emphasis on them
Usually garner less talent ( If you train with the best you get better)
Can have less art connections in industry</p>
<p>Art School:</p>
<p>Good:
Usually have strong foundation/art programs
Usually attract more talent
Can have better connections in the industry
Workload: 75% art and 25% liberal arts (this could be a plus or a minus)
Diverse ART related majors (illustration, fashion design, etc.) (plus or minus)</p>
<p>Bad:
Harder to pursue other interests (like a lot of schools don’t offer foreign languages, but most do have programs that allow you take such courses at other schools in the area)</p>
<p>Looking at the pros and cons, its important to remember that not all schools fit this description. A liberal arts school can have an awesome graphic design program and an art school can not, but this is the trend. Personally I decided on an art school because I wanted to spend more time on my major and I wanted to be surrounded by some of the best students in major. I just didn’t see the same level of work at some of the liberal arts schools I looked at, but that is my own personal opinion. What it really comes down to is what sort of college environment you want to be in. You can go to a normal school and do just fine. It just depends on what you think is best for you.</p>
<p>Here is a post that I published in these forums around 2006.</p>
<p>A stand alone art school has some advantages and disadvantages:</p>
<p>Pros: More courses offered in each art major
Many more art students to bouce ideas off
Strong facilites in art
Large number of studios</p>
<p>Cons:
Usually liberal arts offerings aren’t usually as good as that of a good university
(although many art schools have arrangements with nearby colleges for kids to take courses. Thus, MICA has an arrangement with Johns Hopkins and RISD has an arrangement with Brown)</p>
<p>Only meet other art students,which can be quite insular
Usually, doesn’t have the same number of artistic courses choices as found in stand alone art schools.</p>
<p>If a kid doesn’t want art or wants to switch to a non-artistic major, they would have to transfer schools.</p>
<p>Also, with stand alone art schools, usually 70-75% or more of the courses taken are in art related topics. With universities, it is usually 60-65% of courses are taken in art related topics. With LACs, it is usually about 50-60% of courses are in art related topics.
Also, at universities, there is usually more interdisciplanary projects. Thus, if you want to learn about animation as it applies to archeology, you might be able to get some experience with a university that you probably won’t get at a stand alone art school.</p>
<p>Some universities have some strong art programs that rival that of stand alone art schools. University of Cincinnati has a very well known applied art program.Syracuse university also has a very repudable art program in many facets of art.</p>
<p>You should check out both the course offerings, placement center and general educations requirements at each school.</p>
<p>"I just didn’t see the same level of work at some of the liberal arts schools I looked at, but that is my own personal opinion. "</p>
<p>I don’t really agree with this. I’ve seen some pretty lousy work at some very highly respected art schools and some excellent and superior work at some LACs. I guess you have to keep in mind that this depends on the viewer’s personal preferences also as Bowman points out. Art is a very subjective course.</p>
<p>Art schools tend to be very expensive and often don’t offer much in the way of grants or if they do it doesn’t cut your costs down that much unless you’re a real “star.” </p>
<p>One caution, be sure you want to stick to art if you choose an art school. Your credits will not be as readily transferable as from an LAC because most of your credits are going to be art related. Even the stand alone credits from the liberal arts side can be tricky because they may not be as strong and therefore as transferable if you decide to move back to an LAC. So you will have spend a considerable amount of money for credits that can’t be transferred. That of course doesn’t negate the experience you get but it’s certainly something to consider if you’re not totally sure you want an art career or courses.</p>
<p>Art school is usually much more competetive, a heavier workload, and the people come out with stronger work. Art schools usually possess weaker academics and poor options outside of art. It’s basically a college experience suited to people who want to focus on art more than a liberal arts experience. If not certain art is your calling it’s safer to go LAC but if you are certain it doesnt make sense to pick a LAC over an art school as the general rule is that art schools have greater intensity and focus.</p>
<p>Of course, a school that focuses entirely on art would likely have even stronger art work coming out but then your getting into ateliers.</p>
<p>Timkerdes notes, “Art school is usually much more competetive, a heavier workload,”</p>
<p>Response: I don’t think this is necessarily true. My daughter attended University of Cincinnati School of Design, Art, Architecture and Planning. She worked like a dog thoughout her career. I can’t imagine anyone working more hours or having to put in more all nighters than she did. I think it does depend on the school and on the program. Also, I would bet that liberal arts courses at universities require more work and are given at a higher level than that found in stand alone art schools, which creates more work in the freshment and first semester sophomore years.</p>
<p>I think making generalizations about whether “better” art is done in art schools or LACs is a worthless argument. “Good” art is very subjective. For the sake of argument let’s talk about successful or known artists. I suspect that if you made a list and went through the bios you would find just as many coming from an LAC type of education as an art school. The hype of course from the arts schools is that their work is “better” but as I said, art is subjective, what is “better.” It may be true that you will see more work and perhaps more progress if one is working in an environment where the entire focus is on producing, talking about and making art. However there is an argument to be made for a more well-rounded education also.</p>
<p>Anyway I just don’t think this is an argument that can be made. None of us know what each poster’s preferences are, what draws their eye, one of us can say I saw better “art” at art schools but that might mean they saw work in a genre that they find appealing. It doesn’t necessarily mean that the art is “good.” </p>
<p>My suggestion is similar to Taxguy’s, if you are positive, really positive, that art is the field for you then look still at both LACs and art schools but feel more comfortable picking an art school. But please do keep in mind that those credits are going to be minimally transferable if you decide it’s not the path for you.</p>
<p>I am honestly very confused by some of the posts here. I do not think anyone here has said LACs are superior to art schools, or you cannot make it unless you go to art school, or that these pros or cons cannot apply to either an art school or an university. If artsmarts or taxguy had fully read both mine and Timkerdes post, you would see that. </p>
<p>There are advantages to going to an LAC just as there are advantages to going to an art school. Regardless of what some people say, they are not the same experience. Even when I was at USC, a former Calarts professor and now USC professor told me exactly that. </p>
<p>There is much to be said about a liberal arts education. Having a well-rounded education expands your horizons and does a lot for you as a person and artist. I am not only interested in art so being able to explore different subjects has always been very important to me. It was very hard for me to decide not to go to USC because I knew I was going missing out on a great liberal arts program. </p>
<p>And just as there were advantages to going to an LAC, there were also advantages to going to an art school. I know art is subjective, but the reels I saw coming out of Ringling and Calarts were hands down better than the ones I saw coming out of USC undergrad. I met a student who chose Calarts over USC there and while she said she loved USC to death, her friends who had decided to go to Calarts were progressing faster than her animation class. Why? Because they spending more time on animation. The student I met said that it was a bit of a sacrifice, but she was sure she’d be able to catch up in the summer. A lot of what determines your skill as an artist is pure practice. The more you practice, the better you get. An art school 25% 75% workload can make it easier to hone your skill. Does this mean that that USC student was worse than the students at Ringling or Calarts or that one program is better? No. It just meant she would have to spend more time outside of class to catch up. </p>
<p>I do not think that making generalizations about what is better in art schools or LACs is worthless at all. They are different college experiences that students should be aware of. You cannot have your cake and eat it too. There are things you’ll miss out on by attending an art school just as there are things you’ll miss out on by attending an LAC. You just have to decide what program suits you best. At the end of the day, you will decide how successful you will be, not where you went.</p>
<p>Bowman, the other poster said
“Art school is usually much more competetive, a heavier workload, and the people come out with stronger work.”
That’s a pretty definitive statement.
And I acknowledged that you said it was a personal preference. However now I see that you were talking about animation and film. I would think that for film types of studies yes, the work would usually be stronger coming from a school that focused just on that type of work because requires not only a lot of focus but also is very labor intensive.</p>
<p>However I was speaking in regards to fine arts and graphics/advertising which is what the original question was about.</p>
<p>Also general statements about LACs vs art schools. Fine. What I was referencing was generalizations about the quality of the art as in the above quoted statement. Sorry I just think that people “come out with stronger work” is way too general a statement. As I said I would take any statement like that with a few grains of salt if I were a poster just asking a basic question. You don’t know the preferences or direction of that person, as I said you might be someone who prefers a very different approach or genre than what that particular person likes.</p>
<p>I totally agree with your last statement.</p>
<p>Bowman, I don’t think I made any generalizations about the quality of work coming out of art schools vs. universities. I tried to give an unbiased view of the pros and cons of each type of institution.</p>
<p>As for one type producing better quality work, I don’t feel that is the case. I have seen both extraordinary work and very mediocre work coming out of both stand alone art schools and out of universities.</p>
<p>I used the word “usually” which I meant as “in general”. Now I would also say that my evaluation was fair in that I also indicated that the general drawbacks of Art schools were weaker academics (independent of art) and no oppurtunities outside of art-based careers. This is also a general statement, howeer, there was no attempt on anyone’s part to contradict it like the former statement about the benefits of art programs. </p>
<p>I think it is fair to say that a program where students spend the vast majority of their time creating art - a program that is designed to specialize in art - will attract more students focused on creating art, will develop artists further along, will devote more energ to art, sustain stronger relationships to artists in industry etc… than a school that just has an art department in general.</p>
<p>However, there will also be natural trade-offs and vice versa.</p>
<p>Also, Taxguy you mention a very reputable design program - U cincinatti - but I would say thats an exception to the rule just as saying schools like Mica, RISD, and Cooper Union represent exceptions to the rule that art schools have weak academics.</p>
<p>Furthermore, artsmarts, I can get how you would say that a lot of these things are subjective - which they are, but there are degrees of subjectivity and the things that are being evaluated arent highly - or even very moderately - subjective. If your evaluating quality based on craft, technical execution, and a clear fulfilment of artistic objectives or student success based on personal satisfaction, Graduate school placement, and professional placement then these things arent very subjective or at least no less subjective then comparing any other kinds of schools.</p>
<p>Now, if you still disagree with all of that, would you also disagree with the statement that "someone who spends more time and energy on their art and gets a more in-depth experience will improve faster than someone with equal ability and potential who spends less time and has a less in-depth experience?</p>
<p>Also, I dont see how film/animation would be a different category as it follows the same premise and follows essentially the same conditions.</p>
<p>I’m not trying to get into an ongoing argumentative discussion here. But just for the record I am someone who has worked in art related fields for over 40 years (advertising mostly) after receiving a BA in Fine Arts with a year of post-graduate work overseas. In addition I am the parent of an art student who just recently spent a substantial amount of time touring schools. From my perspective I saw work of varying degrees of ability and competence in both settings. I’m not sure your claims of more graduate school entries or better art connections coming from art schools would hold up to actual figures. Of course a school where your entire focus is on art might see a more rapid progress in development but in some cases I saw such a heavy focus on “conceptual” thinking that the skills needed to execute quality work were very lacking so the conceptual work was not of particular substance when executed. As I said film and animation are extremely labor intensive so, in my opinion, one could easily benefit more from a school that’s specific to the field.</p>
<p>My other concern is that students looking at schools weigh their choices very carefully in terms of financial requirements so they do not come out of school with heavy debt burdens. Particularly those in art related fields at this point in time. But overall I think Bowman hit the nail on the head, in the end it’s not so much where you are but what you do.</p>
<p>Also consider than you can have the best of both worlds. There are unique programs such as the cooperative program Brown University has with RISD. About 20 students a year, get accepted to BOTH institutions and can do their art program at RISD while taking academic type courses at Brown. Of course, you’d have top be a top tier student, both academically and in the talent department, to get admitted to this tiny program. And, though I’m sure you don’t have to pay full tuition for both, we are talking big bucks here…</p>
<p>There’s been some discussion over the years here about those programs. They sound quite difficult to get into and quite difficult to maintain. But yes, it is an interesting possibility.</p>
<p>Now, I’ll readily admit that I’m not someone with 40 years of experience in an art related field, but I’ve discussed this issue at length with many who have similar credentials (people with degrees from both art schools and universities) and what they all (except one) said conformed to what I have said. Even the vast majority of people who taught at Universities who I questioned about this issue said these things and reccomended that students avoid Liberal arts colleges (in general) if they intended to study art mainly. One Painting Professor from University of Cincinatti even encouraged his own students to transfer to somewhere else (I assume it’s not as strong in Fine arts as design).</p>
<p>However, only one teacher I talked to stated that students should apply to State schools and LAC’s as well as art schools because the costs of attending art schools (which is definitly an issue). </p>
<p>I also viewed a very large amount of colleges within the east coast and had at least 9 colleges come to our school to show us work from their schools and review our portfolios. Plus the people I talked to who were transfers usually transferred from LAC’s to art schools because they didn’t like the quality of the programs they initially intended.</p>
<p>Now, I’m not trying to contradict you just for the sake of it, I’m just trying to say that the things I have said are not the result of lazy uninformed opinions but a lot of investigation and research. </p>
<p>BTW the grad school comment was exclusively about people who go on to MFA’s and MA’s in art therapy or art teaching, I dont have any ideas about people who switch fields.</p>
<p>And I still dont get how studying film/animation would make a difference in terms of workload. From what I’ve seen students at art schools work like horses regardless of what they are specializing in.</p>
<p>Also, Pafa has a dual degree agreement with UPenn similarly to Risd and Brown, and from what I’ve seen it’s an easy way to get a Penn degree (if cost isn’t an issue).</p>
<p>Timkerdes, Yes, I would NOT advise people to go to University of Cincinnati for Fine Arts. They are known for design and not fine arts, although UC does allow joint registration with Cincinnati Academy of Art; however, there are universities that are very strong in fine arts such as UCLA, Temple University and some others that might well rival stand alone school offerings. However, with all this said, stand alone art schools will generally offer more courses in fine arts and even in some design areas that that of universities and especially offer more than most LACs. Does this necessarily result in better work overall by students at the end? The answer is …maybe.</p>
<p>It just crossed my mind, are Universities with schools of Art, also lumped in with LAC’s or with stand alone art schools? I considered Temple/ Tyler school of art grouped with stand alone schools. </p>
<p>When I considered LAC’s I thought of colleges (no graduate schools) with art departments (no school for art) that only offered BA’s.</p>
<p>When I think of LAC’s I think of Swarthmore, Amherst etc…</p>