"We are a culture that increasingly questions consumption and advertising, which are at the heart of industrial and graphic design disciplines. We rely on a dynamic and constantly evolving technological platform that touches all aspects of life. There is an increased demand for service–based jobs as our country re–evaluates economic sustainability. People are demanding quality, reflective and meaningful experiences in their world.
Yet design education, as a whole, hasn't embraced these challenges and opportunities.
To be direct and explicit, educators who have taught the same foundation studies courses for years will need to dramatically revamp their courses or face irrelevance. Educators who have repeated the same kerning and hand–drawn letterform exercises will find themselves teaching at a school that simply isn't focused on typography anymore – and tenure notwithstanding, these individuals will find themselves without a role. Educators who are unwilling to retrain themselves will be replaced.
If you are one of these educators, or you work at one of these programs, you may acknowledge these necessary shifts, but find personal action to be difficult. It is difficult. And it's difficult because the shift is large, fundamental and of critical importance. You'll need to read, and take courses, and attend new conferences; you'll need to re–build yourself and your expertise in a new light. You'll go from knowing all of the answers to not even knowing the problems.
But it's no longer a matter of choice. Because if you aren't able to find a new opportunity, a new specialty, and embrace the topics described above, you may soon find yourself alone or replaced. Our subject matter is too important, and our role too fundamental, to leave to the traditions of even great educational movements like the Bauhaus. The subject of design is the humanization of technology, and as long as technological advancements continue, so the pragmatic and day–to–day jobs of designers will continue to morph. And so must design education continue to evolve."
(Jon Kolko, 2010)
Jon Kolko (2010). 'Remapping The Curriculum', AIGA | the professional association for design
AIGA Design Educators Conference "New Contexts/New Practices", October 8–10, 2010, at North Carolina State University in Raleigh
"The problem with any debate over design is that the intellectual resources with which the debate is typically engaged are themselves located within the field, and the competing definitions of design is the terrain over which struggles are fought and the resources used in those struggles. Each actor (or in this case, each designer) engages in these struggles and does so from a position within the field; each has a situated viewpoint and this viewpoint shapes the analysis of the field (Bourdieu, 1983). Thus, there is a need to be able to view the field afresh, from a perspective that is not associated with any specific position within the field but rather objectifies the field. This is not to argue for an 'ultimate–truth' perspective, but rather to suggest that, in order to be able to analyse the debates, one needs specific kinds of tools. Designers work with knowledge to 'do' design. When analysing the field of design the object of study has now shifted: it is not the design object but knowledge itself as an object that is being studied. For engineering a bridge, engineering knowledge is valuable; for designing a house, architectural knowledge is valuable. For analysing knowledge, a theory of knowledge itself is valuable."
(Lucila Carvalho, Andy Dong & Karl Maton, 2009, p.485)
Fig.1 Legitimation codes of specialisation Source: Maton (2007:97)
2). Carvalho, L., Dong, A. & Maton, K. (2009) 'Legitimating design: A sociology of knowledge account of the field', Design Studies 30(5): 483–502.
[An interesting yet epistemologically flawed effort. The paper seems to stumble through its attempt to occupy a neutral perspective on design knowledge. In doing so falls into the familiar trap of positioning 'creativity' and 'originality' against 'critical thinking' and 'analysis'. It attempts to advance a thesis based on the romantic notion of the individual whose process of design appears to operate independently from culture and any effort to communicate with an audience.] ––>
"The interest and use of interactive methodologies continues to grow among artists, curators and funders. Yet, each artistic discipline and even each individual artist uses an independent language for describing interactive works. There is currently no commonality between these languages.
Architecture of Interaction is a project realized by a group of five artists and theorists who have set out to develop a communicatory toolbox that can be useful to talk about and compare the processes, meanings and effects of interactive work, especially the parts of interactive work where no outcomes or precise outlines can be defined.
Architecture of Interaction really came from a desire to connect vocabularies, to develop a more sophisticated discourse and to share the eclectic and hidden ideas and processes involved in interactive works from various disciplines from theatre, music, dance, film, visual arts, performance to new media. The main idea is to make interactive working methods more tangible and discussable first of all between other artists from very different backgrounds, but the project also gives a resourceful insight into the tricky zones of interactivity for critics, curators, commissioners and interested audiences."
(Architecture of Interaction)
[The research and shared work of Architecture of Interaction has been brought together into a book, available from: http://architectureofinteraction.wordpress.com/2009/10/06/the–book/]
"Written by David Chiavegato and its director, Tim Hamilton, Truth In Advertising is a genuinely funny comedy that was, somewhat bizarrely, also nominated for a Palm d'Or in 2001. Colin Mochrie, best known as a regular on Whose Line Is It Anyway? in the US and UK, is the boss in an advertising agency where everybody tells the embarrassing truth about all the crap they talk and bollocks they make and peddle..."
(Ed Wiles, FILMSshort.com)
Tim Hamilton (2001). 'Truth in Advertising' (Canada). 12mins [http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0283648/].