Thinking out loud

I am highly interested in hearing reactions to this post, especially if you disagree. Twitter me at @tha_rami or email me at feedback [at] ramiismail [dot] com if you have any critiques, insights or notes.

This post is a personal statement and does not necessarily reflect the opinion of anyone but myself. I do not claim to know more than the educators at the Utrecht School of Art & Technology. These are just points that occurred to me in my struggle to figure out my future, to help me decide whether or not to continue my study at aforementioned institute. It does not include any positive points for this exercise; the idea is that things I perceive as positive do not require to be disproven by people with other perspectives - things I perceive as negative might be interpreted in another way that makes them positive for my cause. Some of these points might be common for HBO-level studies - but in my opinion, since I am paying €1700 a year, that’s no reason to ignore it.

Bullet list of fundamental problems with the Game Design & Development course at the Utrecht School of Art & Technology as noted by a sophomore student.

Specialisation

• The study is focused on a ‘jack-of-all-trades, master-of-none’ principle.
• The study does not offer adequate programming or art classes for either specialisation.
• While this is understandable for a ‘design’-school, the techniques taught are not easily applicable in design either.
• Through forcing students to work on three modules (Design, Art, Development) the study does not encourage (or actually discourages) specialisation, while the industry requests specialized individuals.
• The study assumes people to be self-didactic in specializing, but does not actively encourage so.

Study program

• The study does not, or barely offer new or additional education during the 2nd year.
• The study has little relevant focus on a good portfolio, with its program leading to an unclear and crowded portfolio with a myriad of unrelated and unconsistent assignments while presenting a clear vision is a key requirement for any designer.
• The study often forces people to work in groups of people with wildly varying skill-levels, often duping those with high motivations/skill-sets.
• The study offers many distractions including but not limited to required attendance to often unrelated lectures, classes unrelated to specialisation or course.
• The study has a system with a project running simultaneously to three modules (Design, Art, Development). Each module has its own classes. While this is -in theory- a great system, each professor plans his final assignment in the final week of the current project. This leads to a work overload near the end of each project.
• Professors are not guaranteed to have any work field experience in any related business.

Study focus

• The study focuses purely on the ‘contracted’ game designer, in spite of a significant part of students rather pursuing a independent/published career.
• The study focuses for a large part on applied or educational game-design, while a significant part of students aim for entertainment/AAA game-design.

Miscellaneous

• The study does not offer a working system of feedback towards the institute, although there is a ‘core students’ team that does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the masses.
• Organized feedback by students is not adequately handled or processed.
• The study is unorganized, often leading to problems - of which the burden seems to lay, per definition, on the student.
• Examples are badly defined homework, schedules compiled for each block instead of semester, professors absent or unaware of other classes.