It is with no small amount of internal grumbling I tend to approach writing UC course approvals. I think of them as onerous (at best) and obnoxious (at worst). This was especially true in years past when the work seemed overly redundant and time-consuming. Admittedly, after completing each one, I inevitably gain valuable insight into my curriculum through the process. By putting so much time and thought into the write-up, I can dive a little deeper into details of the course: sequencing, additional resources, potential roadblocks, etc. This always results in my being better prepared for the class overall. That said, I still tend to enter into the task reluctantly. However, recently had a very interesting, and somewhat reaffirming, experience writing the UC Course Approval for Advanced Studio Art (Now called Advanced Art Making). 

 

When I came to the school in 2010 the art program was fledgling. Though there was a photography program prior to my arrival, there was no studio art or digital art program at all. I was tasked with inventing the entire art program. However, as far the administration was concerned, there was already an Advanced Photography class “on the books” and so it wasn’t super pressing for me to write a UC proposal for my new Advanced Studio Art class. So, it was a year later, after I was over the new-to-this-school hump, I wrote up the proposal and received UC approval for Advanced Studio Art …and went about my merry way. 

 

Fast forward to this year, 2018, and it came to my attention that at some point in the intervening years, that course was not renewed with the UC (a yearly requirement for the students to receive UC recognition of the class on their transcripts). Also, the UC had since changed the format of submission drastically, which meant I couldn’t just resubmit the old write up (grumble, grumble, grumble). 

 

My intentions going in were primarily of reformatting, with some slight revisions likely necessary here or there. However, as I started trying to transfer information from old to new formats, I made a very pleasant discovery. Approximately 80% of what I had included in my Advanced Studio Art proposal, I was now teaching in my Intro to Studio Art class! Though this may not sound like a particularly noteworthy at first read, it had a great deal of meaning to me. 

 

Any good teacher meets the students where they are. Because my first students had such a deficit of art education, I designed all my classes to back-fill those gaps. Though it worked well, we made far less progress overall than I would have liked. In addition, the school was not interested in creating prerequisites for any art class. Everyone was able to take any class they wished. So, for the next three years, I taught Advanced Studio Art and AP Studio to students who had no business taking those classes. Some of them weren’t much more than beginners! As the years progressed, however, I was able to put more and more of the essential knowledge into my intro classes, ensuring the students would have the baseline necessary. Eventually, I was also able to craft requirements for class sequencing and teach to higher and higher levels in my advanced classes. Hooray!

 

To be honest, I did all of this organically. I can’t say it was a choreographed or methodical transition, which is why seeing it spelled out in the UC proposals came as a bit of a surprise.  What I can say is that it bloomed from necessity, and was fueled by ambition for what my student will be able to accomplish. While I have always felt confident that the art program I have been building since I came here is solid, this UC write-up was a welcome reminder of how far we have come. (Of course, there are miles to go still yet, but we’ll get there.) 

 

So, in the end, I had re-write the whole damn UC proposal, but for the first time, I was very happy to do so.