Umetnost

As a whole, the proposed third-level study program is extremely ambitious by covering a wide variety of artistic areas, so it was quite difficult to quality assess it as such, a priori - even if it is clear that the applicant is condensing such a diversity into one program also due to the reduction of the number of doctoral programs at the university. The study program positively demonstrates the pedagogical potential of action research and field-specific methods of research work, which gives the possibility of broadly covering artistic and methodological solutions within the artistic discourse, as well as in practice, especially by planned research projects. It also involves the checking of the established critical discourse and professional reflection of student's own artistic production. The relations between objectives, outcomes and competences, and the curricula content of some of the courses are not properly regulated. The optionality (elective courses system) of the study program is not clearly evident, and it is not sufficiently enabled within individual artistic areas the program is supposed to cover. In view of the integration as well as the critical reflection of technologies, the proposed study program remains only to a limited extent responsive to the current state of the art and the development trends, which are today strongly relevant in terms of artistic research and practice in each of the artistic areas. An important point in which the group of experts recognized inconsistency with the Criteria is interdisciplinarity, namely as a basic concept, which is not consistently derived or justified neither in the overall design nor in the structure and implementation planned in the submitted study program. Contributing to this inconsistency is also an important opportunity for improvement, which the group of experts decided to note in the report, namely in the optionality (electivity) of the study program, which, even after the Applicant's Response to the Preliminary Report, remained uncompleted and too formalistic to open up or support possibilities of real and actual interdisciplinarity of this program. Even after the reconsiderations, upon the Applicant's Response, the group of experts still estimates that the interdisciplinarity (incl. optionality) of the submitted program is merely of a technical nature, as it is already determined and thus narrowed through the student's choice of the track (main course) in the artistic field of the study program. Therefore the program is not about interdisciplinarity as a comprehensive and in-depth approach to the study of art or an interweaving of specialist knowledge and insights from all or several represented artistic and scientific disciplines, which would be directed towards a common artistic research focus. In practice, such an extensive and diversified program - without decisive and huge adjustments even before or immediately after its implementation start - will be very challenging to manage in a transparent and correct manner, such that would not only ensure adequate visibility of all artistic areas and offer all participants a truly high-quality academic experience, but would also from the point of view of the involved organizational units of the applicant fulfill its role in the institution's development strategy.