Changes to the career curriculum?

Normally, when the curriculum is discussed among the student body (or between the student body and the faculty), the contradiction that one as a student is not sufficiently prepared to propose things to the career is usually raised. This is something that happens generally in all careers, not only in arts. However, I believe that there are some specific aspects that the arts degree has in this aspect.

I will refer first - in a very general way - to the teaching methods. It is well known that many teachers do not have pedagogical training, being selected to be part of the staff because of their curriculum and contacts. For this reason, it seems that they seek to swell the first rather than to achieve a disposition, profitable ways and seriousness at the moment of teaching. This affects the formation of the students. So, I believe that the fundamental thing is to demand a pedagogical career, with an evaluation of their performance in this aspect.

Now, the facilities of the faculty is another substantial aspect. The faculty of arts of the University of Chile has had problems in this aspect for years (perhaps the worst is the existence of asbestos in the engraving workshop). This has been the subject of discussion in various mobilizations, but has never been resolved for various reasons. The point is that, well, something as dangerous as this would make it unfeasible to hold classes.

It seems to me that these two aspects are the priority ones to change, since to my understanding, the others depend on this. However, it is something that implies a reform that goes beyond the academic group of the university, unfortunately it ends up competing to the state itself (with all that entails).

Time travel? That's a terrible idea

 The very idea of time travel scares me. Watching the development of new generations, even outside the nuclear family, observing the performance of society and its institutions, and with it, our dreams and hopes, is quite complex. I believe that if we knew how well or badly we will do in what we do or what we fight for, many of our objectives would lose meaning.

I think if I were to do that, I would start right here, where I live now. I would like to see how the territory has evolved and with it, this city. Society and nature. If we pay attention to the development of our institutionalism, we may be able to foresee something. Although it is somewhat difficult. For example, the same process of the new constitution establishes that it should be designed not only for the present, but also to last in time and require a minimum of modifications, which is commonly related to ungovernability. This is quite interesting.

On the other hand, and more globally, we cannot ignore climate change. Will societies agree to reverse this unprecedented crisis? To tell the truth, I am somewhat pessimistic about this and the above.

I would not like to stay in the future because it would be meaningless for me to exist in another era. I think the most beneficial thing would be to return to this same era to provide as much information as possible to improve things.

Pictured: The movie Blade Runner. I believe that dystopian futures (like the present one in this film) are closer to reality, due to the deep criticisms they usually contain.