more thoughts on art education

XKCD's take on Academia vs. Business

Upon reflection, I realize that my last post might have given the impression that I am down on liberal and creative arts education, which was not quite my intention. This Chronicle article hits a little bit closer to what I am thinking about. There is a divide between the goals given - and assumed - in higher education and those possible for the majority of students.
While I am grateful that my personal education was not "career-focused," there was always in the air the notion that success was to be found in academics, specifically as a professor of art exhibiting regularly at university galleries and "important" art venues around the world. While never openly discussed or stated, this has been the assumed, singular goal of "success" that all BFAs/MFAs were to aspire. There were other things people became - portrait and wedding photographers, web developers, middle school art teachers, etc - these were all seen to be lower on that "invisible" hierarchy.
However when I first began teaching directly out of graduate school, I was expected to teach students skills and abilities which I had never been taught or had to deal with myself. What is it like to work with a "client" to design a website, photograph a wedding, or create a brand identity? Of course I realized that I had intrinsically picked up these skills anyways and could hypothesize the rest, but always felt a bit like an imposter as the authoritative voice on how these creative skills applied to professional fields. Now that I work outside of the classroom, but still within the creative field, I have found an opportunity to use those skills that I had previously assumed and hypothesized. Fortunately for me and my former students, my assumptions have been, for the most part, spot on!
But more importantly I've learned that there is more than one success to be had with my degree. That "invisible" hierarchy was limited and a big cause of the problem. Art students shouldn't feel as though they've failed because they couldn't reach that presumed ultimate goal of the "academic" - that limited scope of a model of success is really the problem.
For many, academics is not the right place. (Believe me, you've probably encountered many professors who have no business being in a classroom!) I love academics because I love to teach. I have been told by so many that I am a good teacher and I really try to understand cognitive processes to better enhance my teaching. But there are so many out there "mucking up" the works, hogging all the jobs if you will, because they are scared there is nothing else to do with their degree. They've been given the same, narrow model of success - that to "make it" you've got to land that tenure track position with a small teaching load (how ironic is that, be a teacher where you don't have to teach!).
But really is that the only success there is? Should we redefine the professional goals we present to students not just as options during preview days to satisfy fretting parents, but truly and meaningfully throughout their education? We should teach students that there is more than one success to be had and that academics is just one path, not the only path to success. We must broaden the narrow "invisible" hierarchy to be more inclusive if liberal arts educations is to thrive in the 21st century.