India is not the only country to wrestle with the question of how to keep art education relevant. The difference is that other countries have been faster to adapt — even those with far fewer resources.

Finland overhauled its art schools to centre the student as a researcher, not just a learner. Studio work is paired with self-directed projects that encourage experimentation across media. Courses are reviewed every three years, and practising artists sit on curriculum boards to ensure teaching stays connected to current practice.

Singapore’s LASALLE College of the Arts blends academic learning with professional exposure. Students work on live projects with institutions, businesses, and communities. By the time they graduate, they have both a portfolio and a network.

South Korea invests heavily in exchange programmes, sending students abroad and bringing visiting faculty in. The constant flow of ideas prevents the curriculum from going stale.

These systems share a few principles India could adopt immediately:

• Regular curriculum review driven by both educators and practising professionals
• Integrated professional exposure from the first year, not as an optional extra
• Open hiring processes that attract talent from across the country and beyond
• Investment in exchanges to keep students and faculty in touch with international discourse

None of this requires building new universities or throwing money at the problem without direction. It requires policy change, institutional will, and a shift in how success is measured. If the goal is to produce artists who can operate confidently in the global arena, the model is already out there. We just have to stop pretending India needs to reinvent it from scratch.