Talk:Savannah College of Art and Design

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Notability[edit]

Not sure how notable some of these grads are. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.114.66.241 (talk) 01:03, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The list does seem rather insignificant, especially compared to some of the other internationally renowned professors and grads. Skiendog (talk) 18:42, 28 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

At least the faculty is notable[edit]

It says right there in the article, one of them is CPR Certified. You have to admit, for an overt advertisement, this whole Wikipedia article is well-written.2604:E880:2:4:E:0:0:3 (talk) 00:53, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

GDX noteworthy[edit]

Im going to SCAD - atlanta and part of the ITGM program, we had the GDX (Game Developers Exchange) last may and are haveing it again this year, it was a huge success with over 500 people attending with industry professionals, i think that this event is worth mention as it is SCAD hosted and run, there is a site as well from the scad site. Game development students (including myself) are making a game for all the attendees to play and i think this event would be legitimate to add to the festival section, anyone disagree?Tik 17:48, 29 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Monty Hall[edit]

Was Montgomery Hall a coffin factory? That would be much more interesting than a carriage factory which the college constantly refers to in printed and online documents.[Unknown author]

I, too have heard this. i heard that it was originally a carriage factory, made coffins for a little while, then made the "Doors", "Cabinets", and whatever else reamins on the front of that side building. Skiendog (talk) 20:11, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disgruntled[edit]

Many students and faculty feel that the school is expanding too fast and question the motives of the omnipotent President.

I agree about the expansion, but I have no idea how wide spread that sentiment is nor do I think it is very relevant to the article. The Pres is hardly omnipotent. She is accountable to the board. 'Sides, she founded the school along with the Poeters and Rowan. Being that she founded the school with her money and the school is a non-profit organization- just what ill motives are you attributing to her? Seems to me her motives are pure and grievances should be leveled at how she executes her job.

I heard that SCAD is part for-profit. Is that true?

YES. SCAD has two sides... SCAD and SCAD Group Inc. The latter is for profit. If you dig around on the website you can find an organizational chart about which department falls under which group. For example, residence life is a part of SCAD, and the communications department is part of SCAD Group Inc.

While I was a student there, a separate organization for building restoration and investment into the downtown Savannah area was spun off (but I cannot remember what it is called... I'm pretty sure it has SCAD in the name) which is a for-profit investment business, but control of the business is retained by the board. Just FYI Rexmorgan 09:35, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]


note: I know some of the oversight and finance opacity has to do with the fact that they are a private, not a public, entity. notchcode 04:34, 18 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You could include a section on controversies at SCAD, if you really want to go there, as far as who likes/dislikes the way SCAD is run. There are plenty of rumors, so be sure to have a couple of sources for any entries in this topic. Be sure to include the whole hullabaloo over the School of Visual Arts and the aborted call for representative student government that took place at SCAD in the early 1990s. I have firsthand knowledge of the latter topic, and could contribute, if someone wants to draft an initial section. notchcode 16:55, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I am not sure how valuable that would be. Every college and university has disgruntled students, faculty, alumni, etc. and has controversies about the way things are run. However, such issues are typically only of interest to the people who actually attend/work there - not of any historical significance or anything that should be included in the encyclopedia. Rexmorgan 09:37, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Speaking of disgruntled, the user posting trash about 'Palla Wallas liking it...just so-so' (65.212.92.146) is from the Atlanta College of Art. I guess they didn't like the acquisition ;^) I thought about posting their name- there should be a _Wall of Shame_ for tasteless wiki edits. shawn

Is it worth mentioning, in the controversies section, the reorganization of the school after Pres. Richard Rowan left the school? The change from Preston to Poetter Hall, and renaming of dormitories for board members brought in after Rowan's leaving?ThuranX 19:41, 27 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

ThuranX, Preston was renamed Poetter Hall as part of the 20/20 Ceremony, while Paula and Richard were still married and Richard Rowan was President. As for the college's dormitories, I just checked the list online and no names are different then when I attended from 1996 - 2000. The only new names are for new dormatories. I would say that you may have your facts incorrect. Therefore, it should not be included in controversies.

Faculty and Alumni section[edit]

Let's remember to alphabetize these, ok? notchcode 23:35, 10 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Added India Arie. How the heck did we miss her?

International recognition and rankings[edit]

multiple programs/majors at SCAD have been ranked in the top five nationally (DesignIntelligence ranked the Interior Design program first in the nation--passing RISD and Parsons), i would like to see them included. Major accomplishment for the school. Skiendog (talk) 20:15, 29 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Controversy section[edit]

Let's try and keep the language of this section neutral. "Scramble for reaccreditation" is a good example of what we should avoid. - cohesion 14:48, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I wrote the "scramble for reaccreditation" phrase, and I respect the reasons for deleting it; however, I do not agree that ALL my references should have been deleted. All were credible resources. Also, I must ask: what is being done about the fact that all the authors of this page appear to have clear, personal connections to the subject? They are alumni, students, and faculty of the school. This hardly makes them objective. Why, above all, are all their contributions allowed to stand while mine were ALL deleted? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.157.177.161 (talk) 19:07, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Because, even with their connection to the school, they seem to be writing more objectively. Skiendog (talk) 18:39, 28 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This article is not neutral; it is PR[edit]

This article is NOT neutral. All mention of problems in the school's history is being deleted with, apparently, no explanation. It's obvious that this article is being monitored by a person or people connected to the school and determined to see it whitewashed. I notice that the links I added to articles not favorable to the school have ALL been removed, leaving mostly only articles that were produced by the school itself. If that's not skewing, I don't know what is. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.214.137.8 (talk) 05:08, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have restored the edits I made a week or so ago concerning SCAD's litigation with SVA and against www.scad.info. These are neutrally written paragraphs with a formidable amount of documentation. It surpasses my understanding why they would be removed, and I would really appreciate it if my efforts were not insulted by referring to them as "vandalism." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.155.49.31 (talk) 23:51, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dear anon. Apologies, but I have reverted your changes (which are not vandalism, so I don't know why another user has called it that). The language you have used is far from neutral. It seems you are emotionally involved, and should either abstain from adding information to a topic you feel strongly about, or work extra hard to avoid promoting a particular point of view. The Neutral point of view policy is an essential part of Wikipedia and must be followed by all editors. I have no problem with the content you are adding (as you can see from my user page and contributions, I have no link to the college), just the way it is written. Somno (talk) 00:46, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Here are some suggestions about how you can improve the neutrality of your text.

  • "A local newspaper columnist notes that one family's single inquiry resulted in "monthly letters, literature and phone calls" about the school." - why is this relevant, particularly in the lead paragraph?
  • "student protests at SCAD centered around a lack of student involvement in the school's government" - could be "students protested against the low level of student involvement in the school's government" - doesn't take sides.
  • "Litigation over cyber gripe site" is not a neutral header. Suggest something like "Houeix website controversy" or "Website controversy" or "Website litigation".
  • "A former SCAD professor, Philippe Houeix, launched a website which complained, among other things, that SCAD pressured him to enroll in one of its master's programs" - suggest "Philippe Houeix, a former SCAD professor, accused SCAD on his personal website of pressuring him into enrolling in a master's program."
  • "SCAD disputed Houeix's right to publish his opinions and negative reviews" - not neutral! The use of "right" takes Houeix's side in the disagreement, and we can't take sides. Perhaps "SCAD questioned the content of Houeix's website" or something to that effect? Wired Atom is a blog and not a reliable source.
  • "where he was also green lighted to continue publishing his gripe site" - "where the court ruled in Houeix's favor".
  • "Despite winning his case in court, Houeix's website has entirely disappeared..." - I infer from this that Wikipedia is saying SCAD was involved in pulling down the website (perhaps they were, but you can't imply that without evidence). Suggest "Houeix's website is no longer available..." The links to cached versions are not appropriate here.
  • "Some faculty have felt that they were dismissed for political reasons" - you need a citation for this, and you must avoid weasel words.
  • http://www.landscrape.us/files/ph/sacs.org.html does not seem a reliable source to me. There is no information about who is publishing this private correspondence, so what guarantee do we have that this is correct?
  • I have not checked all of the citations against your claims, but make sure they explicitly support your claims or remove the information. Make sure you reference these using correct citations and they are all reliable sources. Hope that helps. Somno (talk) 01:27, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Somno, I do not understand why you have deleted my additions instead of editing them as you have indicated. In the time it took you to make this contribution to the talk page, you could have edited the article in the ways you suggest, and it appears to me that such editing is well within Wikipedia's acceptable protocols. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.214.128.146 (talk) 16:21, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I have taken the time to explain it to you and help you become a more constructive editor. That is more important to me than fixing your additions. Somno (talk) 00:51, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]


How can spanking me POSSIBLY be more important than improving this article?!?! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.243.123.232 (talk) 16:11, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you read into the history of SCAD controversies, it's no mystery who is editing this article to make sure nothing negative appears. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.69.204.131 (talk) 14:45, 7 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This article should be deleted; it is written like an ad.[edit]

This article should be deleted because 1. it was written entirely by people associated with the school, 2. all its proof comes from SCAD's website which is advertising 3. The article has been aggressively censored to prevent additional information being added which is not favorable to the school. Sincere efforts to improve the neutrality of this article have been removed without explanation, later referred to as "vandalism" and "obscenity," then reproved with wild accusations that the contributor is "too emotionally involved" with the subject—a violation of Wikipedia etiquette which says to "assume good faith." 4. the article is written like an ad. Notice the non-neutral use of "rich" in the first paragraph, "scenic" in the second paragraph, "visionary force" under the Richard Rowan paragraph. The phrase "an undeniable Southern-Gothic feel that is sought by the many movies filmed there" is shameless Chamber of Commerce copy. Where is the documentation that the labs are "well equipped" or that the classrooms are "ample"? Athletics section contains the phrase "vast offerings" which is copy that one would typically find only in a college brochure. The notable alumni section has been padded with some scarcely notable people. The notable faculty section is padded with some REALLY non-notable people. Finally, the external links refer ONLY to SCAD websites which are, I repeat, advertising.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.214.137.214 (talk • contribs)

Please add talk messages to the bottom of the talk page. I have moved this to the bottom. Also don't forget to sign your posts with four tildes (~). Somno (talk) 00:51, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Nothing is stopping you from deleting this article if done in line with the deletion process. I have assumed good faith on your part, by not calling you a vandal (like others wrongly have) and taking time to explain policies. I personally believe that it's easier to not edit topics where I am emotionally involved, hence my advice. Regardless, I agree with you that the article is written like an advertisement and it irritates me too - I hate advertising, and if as you suggest, people from the college are sanitising the article, I'd say there's a conflict of interest in them editing this page. I suggest you take your own advice to me further up and fix it yourself, or follow through the deletion process as you've proposed. If people wrongly accuse you of vandalism, discuss it with them on their talk page or here, rather than reinserting the same info - I think that's the way to move forward with the article. I will keep an eye on the article too to watch out for conflicts of interest - as a neutral party, I hope you see me as an ally to the cause of neutrality, rather than one of those you believe to be whitewashing the article. :) Somno (talk) 04:24, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Anon, these edits [1] [2] are disruptive edits designed to make a point. They are not going to solve anything, and are likely to result in the article being protected and you being unable to edit it, which is not a desirable outcome. Please deal with the issue constructively - the template messages show readers that there are issues with the article, and some of the problems (for example, the flowery language you pointed out above) have been addressed. The editor(s) you say are responsible for denying events have not even edited recently. Somno (talk) 01:00, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Spam to this article[edit]

Someone spammed the article David Spencer with a link to this one. Reverted but smells like some person trying to advertise the wrong way.

24.64.122.89 (talk) 17:31, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I see that this article remains as stubbornly censored and devoid of any legitimate criticism as ever. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.165.42.204 (talk) 21:58, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Durwin Talon is conspicuously absent[edit]

I note that neither the notable alumni section nor the notable faculty section includes Durwin Talon who has his own well-developed page on wikipedia. And he is both an alumnus and a professor of SCAD. He is certainly more notable than Craig Stevens who is included. I would edit the article to include him except that none of my previous edits have been allowed to stand. And nobody bothers to read the discussion page or respond to it either, so hard to know why I'm still wasting my time with this article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.243.111.12 (talk • contribs)

All edits that comply with Wikipedia policies have not been removed. I also wonder why you're still "wasting" your time with this article - either follow the policies so your changes will stay, or move on. Perhaps "nobody bothers" to respond because your edits remain disruptive regardless of how much people try to help you understand how this encyclopedia works. Please prove me wrong this time by editing constructively. Somno (talk) 12:12, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, so it was more important to reproach me (again) than to make the improvement to the article. Tell me again who the disruptive editor is? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.243.123.232 (talk) 16:49, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

History section POV[edit]

The information added regarding the student protest and former instuctor's web site need a serious review for tone and POV. -- Absolon S. Kent (talk) 22:56, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Don't know what information about a student protest you're referring to. There's no such information in this article. There are resources (many) that refer to it, but no one has posted a summary of those events that has been allowed to stand. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.243.123.232 (talk) 15:52, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]


The user in question has had the neutral point of view policy explained to him/her several times over the past year or so, yet keeps resorting to disruptive editing. I used to hope he or she would eventually contribute constructively, but it's increasingly unlikely that will ever happen. Somno (talk) 12:00, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Okay, I'm the disruptive edits guy. First, I need to clarify that this discussion has totally degenerated into hostile accusations directed at me while the article remains basically an ad for SCAD. That is not good discourse, by any intellectual standards.

Second, I want to clarify that ALL I WANT is for the article to say SOMETHING about the student protests and faculty firings of 1992-93 and the litigation against SVA. These events are well known to everyone in Chatham County. People who edit this article are really embarrassing themselves and Wikipedia by not acknowledging these events in the article. I have provided all the resources needed for somebody to write the summary of these events to whatever unique standard of neutrality you desire. As I was NOT allowed to write the summary, I call on Somno or somebody else to write it, add it to the article, and let it stand. Then I can disappear completely from this page and never trouble you again. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.243.123.232 (talk) 16:19, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Section move[edit]

I was going to add the following in the history section, but I really saw no point including an obvious POV issue in the article. If someone can cleanup, please do so and readd to the article.

Unlike many collegiate institutions, SCAD does not tenure its faculty. Some faculty have felt that they were dismissed for political reasons and/or for supporting student activities aimed at making SCAD more participatory.[1]

Since its founding, SCAD has operated on a merit-based system of employment, rather than a tenure-based system. This decision was made based on several factors, particularly because established systems of tenure often do not reward quality teaching, because these systems can put minorities and women at a disadvantage, and because students are best served by faculty who are employed on a merit-based system. Despite a 1993 report by the American Association of University Professors, an organization with no professional affiliation to SCAD, the college boasts an annual faculty retention rate around 95 percent, demonstrating the success of the merit-based employment system of the college.

In 1993, the American Association of University Professors censured the Savannah College of Design for violations of academic freedom. Specifically the AAUP committee which investigated SCAD found that professors had been fired, with almost notice given, for working with students who criticized the college.[1]

-- Absolon S. Kent (chat), 21:49, Sunday, April 28, 2024 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ a b http://www.aaup.org/NR/rdonlyres/F10600BC-EB08-4341-8EF4-8C2395859588/0/savannag.pdf. {{cite web}}: Missing or empty |title= (help)

Where did this ad come from and why is it here?[edit]

Where is the citation for the notion that "established systems of tenure often do not reward quality teaching, because these systems can put minorities and women at a disadvantage"? I can assue you that this is a VERY eccentric notion in academia generally. The above statement is also not AT ALL neutral, as it basically trashes the tenure system which is VERY MUCH based on merit, including quality of teaching, at most universities. This boxed ad for SCAD is REALLY INSULTING to everyone who has or is going for tenure at a reputable institution. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.165.43.171 (talk) 17:19, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

name change? what?? no.[edit]

who added the name change to the top? The "university for creative careers", as i understand it, is just a slogan... there is not referance link, or anything... so, im going to delete it. Skiendog (talk) 16:08, 7 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

the scad website is still registered (2009) by, "Savannah College of Art and Design". if you look at the top of the website, they use the new "University for Crative Careers" slogan. Skiendog (talk) 16:10, 7 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Scad vs scad group[edit]

looking at the org chart and some newspaper articles, I'm a bit confused how the dean of students would fall under the "for profit" section of the school as well as the Atlanta and hk branches. I think this is worth having a neutrally worded section on to better explain the two parts dm (talk)

Edit request from Susandiann, 8 April 2011[edit]

To editor: I would like to add Marcus Kenney to Notible Alum section. Here is some info excerpted from Marcia Wood Gallery's website

Marcus Kenney (b. 1972) was born and raised in rural Louisiana and currently lives and works in Savannah, GA. Kenney has had solo museum exhibitions at the Jepson Center at the Telfair Museum in Savannah and the Columbus Museum of Art, Columbus, GA, with upcoming one man and group exhibitions at the Masur Museum of Art, Monroe, LA and MOCA GA, Atlanta, GA, respectively. Kenney has exhibited in museums, institutions, galleries and art fairs internationally, including Israel, Paris, London,Montreal, New York, Boston, Chicago, Kansas City, St Louis and Minneapolis, Miami, and Portland, among others and he has been well-received in exhibits and art fairs in Chicago, New York and Boston. Kenney was also featured in the 2004 New American Paintings Southern Edition. Earlier activity includes inclusion in the Georgia Triennial 2003 and 2002 (a traveling exhibition highlighting a select number of Georgia artists), as well as the exhibition “Georgia Seven” at the Museum of Contemporary Art, Atlanta, GA, 2004, curated by Radcliffe Bailey. His bibliography includes Art in America, Oxford American, The New York Sun, The Boston Globe, Art Papers, New American Paintings, and National Public Radio, among others.

SOURCE: Marcia Wood Gallery (http://www.marciawoodgallery.com/artist/kenney/intro.html)

Susandiann (talk) 17:40, 8 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done (Six similar requests removed) Generally, alumni included on the list should be notable enough to have their own article, otherwise you are just adding a bunch of redlinks. None of the subjects of your requests had an article. Krashlandon (talk) 23:32, 11 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

School Project?[edit]

If anyone associated with Savannah College of Art and Design is reading this, could you please take a look at Talk:Interactive design and Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive241#Possible School Project? Thanks! --Guy Macon (talk) 15:09, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

For-Profit vs. Non-Profit[edit]

Yes, we all know SCAD-vs.-SCAD Group. One is for-profit (SCAD Group), the other (SCAD, the academic/education part of the school) is non-profit. Until we have a separate section/article for SCAD Group, I do suggest we have SCAD labelled as non-profit at the top of this article. I have changed "for-profit" to "non-profit," to align EXACTLY as it is written in the citation. If someone wants to make a separate section within this article, or a new article, talking about SCAD Group and it's for-profit status, be my guest. Skiendog (talk) 03:22, 15 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 21 April 2020[edit]

Add Notable Faculty entry:

John Edgar Browning Department of Liberal Arts. Professor of Liberal Arts, author, editor, and scholar recognized internationally for his nonfiction works about the horror genre and vampires in film, literature, and culture. 66.56.55.56 (talk) 17:10, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

 Done GoingBatty (talk) 21:48, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Katzun[edit]

YouTuber Katzun is an SCAD student as of current (2020). Would they not be catagorised as notable alumni upon graduation? 97.90.223.226 (talk) 14:18, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Undisclosed paid edits[edit]

I have added an {{undisclosed paid}} tag to this article because of extensive editing by a UPE sockfarm, please see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Tactical Fiend for evidence. Users relevant to this page include: The Way of the Fewture (talk · contribs) The article will need a thorough review ensuring due weight, neutral language, and use of reliable sources before the tag is removed. MarioGom (talk) 23:42, 3 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Savannah_College_of_Art_and_Design&oldid=1210104681"