CON • TEXT - Arkitektur- og designhøgskolen i Oslo - AHO

S H I F T I N G B O U N D A R I E SDouble Standards for Professional ExpertiseThe ‘art world’ claims that artists are needed because: “To get the (teacher)students to make ‘good pictures’ is no warranty for them to later be able tofacilitate good work processes for the pupils” (M:Christiansen 2007:31). 139The discussion spins in circles. If volunteers at the local level can be countedas artists into DKS projects (D:KKD 2007), how come the A&C teachertraining, which is very practically oriented, and offers courses in Visual artsand crafts is not counted as valid qualifications by the art world? “… eitheryou are an artist or teach the arts, it is necessary to have a background in thearts” (M:Christiansen 2007:30). 140 What does it then mean to have abackground in art? This ties in with the quality discussion and is not venturedinto in any of the narratives. The question: “What are the quality criteria forprofessional art? Is it the artist that has art as his occupation and livelihood?Or can professional art be developed and performed by amateurs?”(E:Mælum 2006:36), 141 has also been asked in evaluations of DKS. Thedocuments do not discuss if it means formal training, or if informalrecognition of work practice is enough. This to me is a paradox. To be trainedas a teacher and also make ‘good works of art’ does not to the art world meanthat the result will be a good art educator. However, at the same time theartist hero stereotype can be seen as claim towards acceptance for theposition that artists, or even a good local amateur, will automatically be agood art educator.If making a work of art does not qualify student teachers to teach art, whydoes it qualify artists, with no teacher training at all to do a more professionaljob as claimed by the hero — obstacle stereotypes? Is it in the power of beingan artist that they automatically transcend these borders? The stereotypicalclaim that: “The artist’s point of departure demands another presence than theteacher role qualifies for. It is in short two different competencies”(M:Christiansen 2007:31), 142 is presented repeatedly in the media narratives.The teacher obstacle is depicted as incompetent by whom they are supposedto be collaborating with and it is hard to find any objection narratives in thesources of documentations that I have analysed. The same tendency could beseen in the US project: “It was almost amazing to me that they were puttingin print the most condescending attitudes towards schools and teachers I haveever … In their publications! It was flabbergasting to me. It was juststunning” (I:Gee). It seems to me that it is the artists interviewed both in the139 OQ: “Det å få studentene til å lage “gode bilder” er ingen garanti for at de selv skal kunne tilrettelegge godearbeidsprosesser for elevene”.140 OQ: “… enten man er kunstner eller underviser i kunstfag er det behov for en kunstfaglig bakgrunn”.141 OQ: “Kva er kvalitetskriteriet for profesjonell kunst? Er det kunstnarar som har kunsten som yrke og’levebrød’? Eller kan profesjonell kunst utviklast og utøvast av amatørar?”.142 OQ: “Kunstnerens innfallsvinkel krever en annen tilstedeværelse enn hva lærerrollen kvalifiserer til. Det errett og slett to forskjellige kompetanser”.127