It's imperative for current and future generations of Art History majors to have a global worldview of Art History. With the amazing resources and Professors on campus, there is no reason to have Eurocentric courses unless the courses are specifically centered on Europe.

Methodology is a required course for Art History majors to take in order to graduate. The course description:  

To introduce art history majors to the variety of methods scholars have adopted and developed for conveying their perspectives on art history, including aesthetics and art theory.

This course was very thorough with European methodology, and it was taught by a professor that was very knowledgeable and engaging. However, it is clear this professor's specialty is Europe, as the syllabus and core course content didn't include anything outside of Europe. We touched on Egypt once, and it was extremely brief and Eurocentric. If the course needs to remain this way, I think the course should be retitled, European Methodology.

By calling the course simply, "Methodology," a bias is being taught and cultivated in students. If you show this syllabus to any non-Europe focused Methodology professor, they would not tell you it's an accurate course to global methodology.

Someone raised the point, "It's not called Global Methodology." However, the course description implies it, and having the word "methodology" alone implies European methodology is the standard and all other methodologies are simply supplementary.

How can you talk about Vasari without Zhang Yanyuan? How can you talk about Hegel without mentioning spirit resonance?

I don't know anything about Latin American methodologies. I've seen 0 Native American artworks. I've been in college for 5 years now. Self-study aside, I can't help but feel like FIU is severely lacking.

If there is hope for change, I am not asking for our Methodology professor to suddenly become an expert on Chinese Methodology. I am merely suggesting a guest speaker. Lidu Yi would be an excellent guest speaker and is so important to the art history discipline at FIU. She could be reached out to for supplemental materials that students could optionally read to expand their view of methodology. No one is asking Guernsey to go study in China. Without her, I'd almost suggest changing the entire major to "Western Art History." Even the African art classes' content is inseparable from western art history.

Global approaches to methodology would only make more well rounded, open minded students. A broader perspective and more varied methodologies would only benefit our futures.

Hegel without spirit resonance is an incomplete conversation. A comparison of the development of hieroglyphics vs hanzi and how to approach criticizing them would be delightful. There is a timeline in methodology going from "pre art" to "post art." This timeline doesn't match with the east Asian one at all. In the 11th century there was already spirit resonance and naturalism. In methodology we learned about the distinction between writing and art. What about the fact that there is no difference in Chinese art?

If the implementation of guest speakers or sources on these topics is daunting, please consider changing the title of Methodology to European Methodology. There is power in the title of this class. There is power in not having a description implying European methodology is the standard. Zhang Yanyuan was just as scholarly as Vasari. The six principles of art, the three distances... there is so much that is vital to the way I now perceive art that is not discussed in the current Methodology course.