University of Arts Helsinki is currently implementing a curriculum renewal and all degree programmes are involved. Teaching in accordance with the new curricula will start in 2024.
The process is already in its final stages, and the subject groups are currently locking in study structures and the contents of teaching. In the curriculum renewal special attention has been paid to the burden of studies and to ensure that working life skills are realized in teaching. Along the way, students have been given surveys and open discussion events, as well as opportunities to participate in the curriculum development of their own subject groups, for example.
As important as updating the curriculum is, its contents alone do not guarantee the desired learning experience for students. After all, it is ultimately the teachers' responsibility to implement the curriculum. When asking for students' greetings about the OPS working groups, I have noticed how many course contents or course implementation methods are not completely satisfactory. When looking at the descriptions of such courses from the already existing curriculum, I have been able to see that the learning objectives desired by the students themselves have been recorded, but for one reason or another they are not made reality. However, the issue can be too easily reduced to corridor talk between students, and then never reaches those who could really make a difference.
Course-specific course feedback has been developed for gathering the information how students experienced the course. However, the challenge seems to be that the sizes of subject-specific study groups are small, and it is therefore difficult to anonymize feedback. If a student does not have a guarantee of individual protection, this may prevent the student from bringing up the grievances they have experienced or the suggestions for improvement they are considering. We are in contact with the teachers concerned throughout their studies and often also in working life.
The position of authority of the teacher in this regard is still unreasonably large compared to other universities. The traditional master-apprentice –style teaching still lives on, and it can be difficult for a student to question their teacher's instructions and actions. There is still a long way to go from questioning to the student daring to highlight areas for development. The colleges are small. The fear that the teacher could in one way or another influence their own academic success or career development is a real problem in the dialogue between teachers and students.
The traditional master-apprentice setting in the field of art suggests that the teacher knows the student's development and solutions to his or her problems, and the student readily accepts the information with gratitude. What if this setup were reversed? If only the student could be seen as a conscious and self-directed actor who collects tools in his kit around him because he is interested in the topic and oriented to develop. If only the teacher were a mentor whose task is to help find solutions to the problems faced by the student in any situation, and if the teacher is not able to provide functional tools to support the student's development, it would be the teacher's responsibility to pass on his or her teaching responsibilities. An active student would regularly present their learning goals to the teacher, and the focus of the dialogue would be on the student's needs and will, as well as on maintaining and developing motivation. In academia, a dialogical approach to studying should already be the norm.
Things do not change by themselves without the power of change. At the moment, the big wind of change is the OPS reform, but in fact a concrete change in the level of everyday life will only happen if things are boldly brought up. Course feedback, direct feedback survey by teachers and subject group leaders seeking dialogue with students are the first avenues.
In this context, I challenge not only students to speak boldly about the challenges they have experienced, but also the university to self-reflect on the quality of teaching and learning outcomes. Students can also bring up issues to the Student Union of the University of the Arts Helsinki, which takes matters forward anonymously as the common voice of our community. It is a good idea to follow the emails and weekly newsletters if you want to keep track of the opportunities for influencing that are opened on a project-based basis on a weekly basis. Student representation positions in the administration, the so-called halloped places, that are applied for by students are found in every important decision-making body of the university. Most positions of trust are also remunerated.
Education at the University of the Arts Helsinki is one of the most expensive in Finland, which is why teachers' responsibility for the continuous development of teaching must be emphasized and the channels for influencing students must be enhanced. We study at the University of the Arts Helsinki to become art professionals with sufficient knowledge and skills to succeed and develop in the field of work. The content of our studies in relation to the requirements of working life must be constantly reviewed, and our study environment must be safe and support learning processes.
If learning is not carried out in accordance with the objectives and in the best interests of the students, it must be possible to intervene in the level of teaching. We really do have the right to learn!
Jere Hölttä
TaiYon hallituslainen,
Laulutaiteen opiskelija Taideyliopistossa
English (UK) 
Suomi 
Svenska