After I signed up, I had a big bite of my favorite cbd chocolate bar. It really takes the edge off!
You’re gonna fit right in. 
Education will be forever altered in ways that are just beginning to be speculated on by higher edu officials…
From the UK…
backing up just a second, no wonder to me that the head of Microsoft design would blame education (remember when the Surface Phone swept the IDSA awards and folded the next year?)
On to the real topic at hand, can a studio based pedagogy go virtual successfully? I’d say not in one year and probably not ever. the design education process would be like someone here once described as “talking about dancing”
the near term question is how badly will graduates portfolios suffer, and how will entry level hiring managers choose? I think there’s some correlation to how 3D cad software (sexy renders) came to dominate undergraduate work in the last decade - but then when the cost to thinking and innovation became obvious, schools put more emphasis on process and the physical execution. We can expect a return to the weaker, rendering only portfolios for a couple years to come
Entertain me for a moment - my son has played an amazing virtual reality game, even though it’s still rough around the edges, faceted and slow I have to admit it is all enveloping.
When we’ve reached a point that you can be immersed in that type of fully rendered environment, with other students and a professor, with the ability to sketch/feel/sculpt/challenge, with the ability to interact as you do now, then I think the physical equivalent can be realized. So far it’s only the military, a few of the car manufacturers, Boeing and one of two other big companies that have the full-on-almost-there virtual test stations but until then, I’m with you - it’s no equivalent and will hurt educations.
And that’s exactly why my daughter (pursuing graphic design & illustration to start this Fall) is deferring her start date for at least 1 semester and possibly 2 (scholarships intact) while she pursues less expensive elective-equivalent online courses in the meantime. As a proud father, I have to mention that she was accepted at Pratt, SCAD, MICA, UArts & CCA.
The classes I teach are a mixed bag right now. My UCIrvine class was already asynchronous online so nothing changed, but my MA/MBA students are facing a summer of cancelled internships and a Fall of…who knows as of yet. Luckily, as all of this was hitting it was the middle of this Spring semester and I was already transitioning them to work on projects with a client of mine, so their teams and my client’s contacts moved to weekly Zoom meetings, just as I’ve done for my weekly class time with them. That justified their high priced educations for this last 8 weeks but there’s no way the schools could justify continuing to change tuition like they do if the experience is only online.
I hope everyone is safe and healthy. Read up on the blood clots that are becoming prevalent with COVID-19 patients, and not treatment related either - this stuff is no laughing matter. And if you want to refer to an excellent COVID site that updates a few times a day check out: COVID-19 Map - Johns Hopkins Coronavirus Resource Center (you can zoom into your area/County and click on the infographic - it’s well done and updates along with the site).
Good question. I’d suggest that the storytelling aspect of a portfolio presentation will need a lot of focus, keeping people’s attentions in a remote setting you probably have less time than in-person, and will need to keep interest and content moving in a 15-20 minute timeframe.
1 Like
Very late to the thread but I read it all the way through because this a top of mind subject right now that drove me back to Core77 and the discussion boards today. While I’ll wait till I can post my own ‘question of interest’ when the software permits me to, since I’ve gone back to new user settings, let me add a few thoughts on this from the end of 2022 (“the pandemic years”) to synthesize some early thoughts on what might be missing from industrial design education. My eligibility to speak on design education and its evolution, both in the North American context, and in Europe as well as Asia, will either emerge as part of this screed, or I can tack it on later for those who may be interested.
The first thing that came to mind as I was reading the OP is that perhaps what people are missing is a “grand unifying vision for design”, and I suspect this is why the Bauhaus is referenced so often. Regardless of its contemporary relevance and impact (and yes, Ulm was more influential in its outreach and impact) what really sets the Bauhaus apart was its clear vision and mission, its design philosophy, its values, and the coherence of its narrative and story of what it was aiming to achieve, as manifested in its approach to education.
For discussing what I mean by this “grand unifying vision of design” I refer to an article by Richard Buchanan based on his conference keynote in Helsinki in June 1994. Its called Branzi’s Dilemma: Design in Contemporary Culture and the issues it raises are all the more visible today due to our deeply interconnected digital zeitgeist, accessible via our screens on demand. Buchanan titled it in response to an essay written in 1985 by the Italian designer Andrea Branzi, with whom Buchanan proceeds to debate on the future of design before concluding with his own directions.
Branzi’s call for action envisioned a second modernity – one which was fragmented, tribalized, and comprised purely of individual designers pursuing their own concepts of identity and values, unguided by any one singular vision or value system. Thus, in Buchanan’s words, Branzi’s dilemma is that of identity and moral purpose, heralded by a collapse of modernism, and thus a “unifying ideology of design and world culture” (Buchanan, 1994; 1998). It is impossible to summarize or synthesize Buchanan’s case against a lack of unifying ideology, with default to power and control, in the context of design and designers, and the power they wield to shape our world. Instead, here’s a screencap that many may recognize in industry and practice.
This was said almost 30 years ago in 1994. Going by what can be observed through my screen alone, it is not hard to arrive at the conclusion that this where we are now, in 2022 as we grapple with persuasive design, dark design, addictive design, and the plethora of individuated ills of fragmentation, tribalization, and lack of a vision of a healthier, more sustainable and resilient world.
Could this be underlying Shum’s original screed on the need for change, given his employer and operating environment?
“…the impact of tribalism on design and the development of technology is unconscionable for individuals who have made creativity and innovation their life’s work. […] At least as human beings, if not as designers and educators, we must think about the consequences of renewed factionalism and tribalism in the contemporary world. Where will our students find moral purpose to guide their work? Can anyone familiar with the events of the twentieth century seriously give their trust to personal sensitivity and good intentions in matters as complex as designers face today?” (Buchanan,1994; 1998)
IMHO, we need things like an ethics course, or a discussion on values and how we manifest them in our products and product systems, even if we’re not wholly aware of them or able to articulate them. We need to question the underlying value-driven agenda of even our design processes - UCD/HCD extracts data and exploits it, while participatory design (particulary the Scandinavian tradition, see Gregory, 2003) attempted to move from the “Expert-led” approach to the “User as partner & collaborator” approach (see Sanders, 2006; 2008 - figure shown below).
I think we need more discussions on our choices of process and methodologies, the values they embed (or don’t), and conversations around the designer’s own value systems and ethical stance.
Are you ready to step out into the world to create and make products without having developed and written out your own ethical stance, similar to the way positionality statements and subjectivity statements are written for qualitative research?
That’s what I’d ask for design education for this century, imo.
Thanks for the interesting reply and links.
I think we had a ‘professional ethics’ course in college. This was Syracuse U, mid-90’s, well before everything really changed. It isn’t what I’d start a program with, although it might weed out certain students. Ours was paired with ‘professional practices’ which was a portfolio course.
The Scandinavian knowledge base of participatory, co-design, activity theory should be taught and practiced IMO in education. I think there’s a little dabbling in things like contextual inquiry and of course straight-up ‘usability’ but it doesn’t move the needle.
1 Like
There’s a quote from Elizabeth Sanders (Sanders & Stappers, 2008) that captures the challenge of introducing the Scandinavian tradition in many other jurisdictions, particularly those where healthcare, education, childbirth, 12 months of paid maternity leave, and daycare is not free or of negligible cost.
Embracing participatory thinking flies in the face of the ‘expert’ mindset that is soprevalent in business today. The existing power structures in companies are built onhierarchy and control. Co-designing threatens the existing power structures byrequiring that control be relinquished and given to potential customers, consumers orend-users. It is very difficult for those who have been successful while being in control togive it up now or to imagine a new way of doing business that can also be successful.
2 Likes
Thanks for the link to that interesting paper. Skimmed it real quick - the PPT methodology certainly is popular in academia but like many kinds of research, suffers from inadequate ‘transfer’, ie. needing to have concrete findings on which to take measurable actions and results. I didn’t realize (until you mentioned it) that all the papers I’ve read on the Scandinavian PPT methods used in healthcare omit insurance companies from their relationship maps! Duuuh.
I think the current month of the IDSA periodical focuses on education topics, I’m almost tempted to sign up again.
1 Like
My undergraduate program was modeled on Bauhaus in the late 80’s. Every 1st year student core studio classes were 2-D, 3-D, and drawing.
They have slightly modified the program to be more “modern” but I’m not sure it’s an improvement,
I’m really glad I had that experience. I don’t believe new technology needs to fundamentally change a 100+ year old process. I think that in this day and age a good 9 months spent only in the real world might make a lot sense.
1 Like
@bdgCogs That what my first year was in the late 90s. A full year of 2D theory (mostly color and composition), 3D theory (Working all kinds of materials at different scales with different prompts), and drawing (mostly charcoal figure drawings, but also some other mediums and subjects), in addition to a full year of art and architectural history with a heavy emphasis on the different movements and how they effected each other over time.
At the time I was so anxious to get that year over with and get into ID… now, almost 30 years later, those freshman year classes are the only ones I ever think about!
First day of drawing the instructor asked “who wants an A?”… and proceeded to tell the TA to give the kids who raised their hands an A. Then he told us “No one gives a sh!t what grade you get, they care what you can do” … that was day! That phrase stuck with me my 4 years of school and beyond.
I was at the freshly invented University of the Arts, a school I never see mentioned we people ask about ID programs.
Where did you go to School?
University of the Arts in Philly? That school rarely comes up! Would be great to know more about it. You had a good experience?
I went to RISD which at least at the time was very much an old school art school experience, even for the time. I really appreciate it. The late 90’s was an interesting time to go. For example Illustrator existed and Quark Express for layouts, yet the graphic design program had to learn how to hand set type and hand ink fonts for their sophomore year before they could touch digital tools. I think it was to the benefit of those students.
ID was a bit more behind but we did have some CAD classes and illustrator/photoshop, but most everything was still hand done. For the way I learn, I think it helped me.
As of late 2022, this thread’s muse Albert Shum has gone Flâneur (French idiom for male strolling about detached from society).
I disagree with the idea to devote resources to educate first where power and control are being distributed in design education rather than color, form, communication, mass production and culture/demography with a dash of complexity theory as fundamentals. Like the Bauhaus, this is a 20th century idea imo. This narrative is based upon Marxist Socialist Communism and is hurting the current cohort from the UK to USA to Taipei, Tokyo and Shanghai who are going deeper into debt at the behest of the university and financial systems. Furthermore, the petering out of Design Thinking due to its lack of ability to execute growth strategies based upon all of the insights created with such a methodology, is more evidence that spreading design far and wide to those who are not designers has created more stress than harmony as it stands at the beginning of 2023. Even IDEO is now going back to basics with their latest Madison avenue strategy and executive reshuffling.
What this thread is missing imo is the impact that demography is now playing on all aspects of society not just design and design education. Shum also failed to mention how measuring demographics are becoming the default intelligence discussion for any product or service that will have a lifespan of 5-10 years even before resources are assigned. Our technology and information systems have made this possible in the last 15 years. This focus on the user’s emotional wellbeing instead of the product/service is tired and has holes in its knees. The DSM, Psychology, Anthropology, Sociology et al need to be shown the door of the design studio.
As the boomers exit the financial markets, we are now seeing how their capital is moving from the stock and bond markets to cash and treasury securities due to the sharp increases in interest rates. GenX is in their prime earning years, but due to another economic downturn many are losing their jobs due their their high salaries that come at the last phase of their working years. The last of the millennials left the university system a few years ago and are now on shaky ground in terms a of stable economic future to ply their internet and social media skill sets. GenZ are currently moving through the higher education system and are the target of new design education policies that are moving away from consumption based to data based lifestyles of work and society. The current data on their generation is screaming about skyrocketing mental health problems due to poor health, income inequality and over exposure to living on line 24/7. The narrative on Gen Alpha is currently being formulated but due to the Covid pandemic, they are already 2 years behind in their education which is accompanied by never before levels of stress during primary education due in part to data mining methodology.
I’ve decided to not include source links with my posting as I find it creates unnecessary disputes that are not germane to this specialized group of designers and design educators. Google now provides data links to every side of the argument I have found. This Core77 platform is driven by empirical experience and personal point of view I have observed. This is why I keep coming back here to post.
Its a good time to retire from Microsoft.
Just trying to understand and clarify, you’re talking about positionality/subjectivity statements being preferably secondary to the more traditional crafts and practices seen in design education?
1 Like
100% agree, foundation year was tedious but truly formative. Many people disliked it. All I needed to know I learned from ‘Principles of 3D Form’ and learning how to patiently cut and hot-glue 3-ply chipboard. Not really but kind of.
2 Likes
The class of 1991 was the first class to go through the University of the Arts in Philly. The prior year they were the Philadelphia Colleges of the Arts. Which was created by combining The Philadelphia College of Performing Arts and what had been the Philadelphia Museum of Industrial Arts and eventually simply Philadelphia College of Art.
I think both schools are part of Philadelphia’s cultural art budget. Everything’s was thread bare and we were in center city during the crack epidemic.
The Industrial Design department had been really built up by Noel Mayo he built a great team of diverse instructors but by the time I was a sophomore he was about to leave and was replaced by Charles Burnette who moved the department towards product semantics.
We also had weekly lecture programs bringing designers to speak about their work.
We had a small Mac lab on a LocalTalk network with a laser printer. Most of the computers were IICi’s and one Mac 2.
The Graphic Design department was a total Basel school implementation with insane discipline and ruling pens.
The Architecture department was complete deconstructionists and I would attend there lecture series as well as a few of the Graphic Design lectures if someone like Tufte was speaking.
We had Aldi’s Pagemaker, Aldus Freehand, and our bitmap editor must have been photoshop. Senior year a previous graduate stopped by and installed I believed MacroMind director.
I feel like I got a good education and I’m surprised that the school is never mentioned here.
1 Like
I don’t agree with the notion that a second generation school led by people from the first school could be more influential than the original.
I had to look Ulm because I was curious what they did that was different and found that is founded in 1953. I actually only care about the first year foundation program that as far as I know was Walter Gropius. The rawness of work done at the Bauhaus school I see as an example of humans trying to understand the concept of manufacturing. The Bauhaus was founded after WW1 and was trying to break away from of all of the “applied arts school” like my alma mater University of the Arts in Philadelphia or Kunstgewerbeschule the Alma mater of Margarete Schütte-Lihotzky the designer of the Frankfurt kitchen. I see that Ulm was a special place at a special time. I don’t see it as overwhelmingly influential.
Finally Josef Albers was a student of Johannes Itten at the Bauhaus before joining the faculty there.
I could sympathetic to the argument that Bauhaus is overrated but not that a later school is more influential.
2 Likes