A few weeks ago I attended the New Designers 2010 Graduate show at the Business and Design Centre in Islington.
I was really struck by the lack of socially responsible/ research based/ co design/ user centred projects, especially with so much design literature discussing this shift.
Following this at the Design of the times (DotT) Do Tank, Andrea Siodmok discussed the lack of “the right kind of designers” to address the social issues we face. One of the breakout sessions was focused on how the ethos behind the DotT programme could be taken into education. There was a general consensus amongst the group that a course focused on design thinking or service design wasn’t the way to go, but the group did feel that there needs to be more ways to open up students to think bigger.
In the UK today, with the social, economic and political challenges we face, it feels that more than ever thinking big is needed. If this is the case, how can we shape education to develop more of the right kind of designers?
From my own personal experience as well as my observations/ conversations with others, a design education at its most basic level should in theory play two roles;
1) Encourage and develop creative thinking while changing the mindset of what design is, and what it can offer;
2) Provide a stronger understanding of communication and visualisation techniques. No matter what happens designers will always need there core base of practical skills.
With so much talk around the role design can play in reshaping society, it seemed staggering that there was little evidence of graduate designers having taken up this challenge on a larger scale.
In order to create a range of graduates who can help to contribute to solving these problems design education would also need to do the following;
· Design Students need to be encouraged and allowed to “think BIGGER” and beyond the project briefs;
· Create an understanding of how design can play a role outside the work of traditional design agencies;
· Enable design students to see the transferable skills they have, and how they can have an impact in other areas. There is a lack of traditional design jobs at the moment and having the understanding and confidence in the skills you can gain from a design education makes you far more versatile;
· For design students/ graduates to understand the skills they have, and see other opportunities to use them;
· Encourage freedom from a chosen discipline to make the most appropriate choice based on a project, people, the research and context.
So, how could we create the situation and environment that allows these changes to happen? I think there are a number of ways this could be tackled, and I’m sure there are many more. My initial thoughts are;
· Could Universities act like DotT? Can they strike partnerships to create live projects outside the traditional areas? Can they also work alongside the NHS, or their local authorities to set the students briefs with the potential to change the area they are living and working. That sounds pretty exciting to me.
· Programmes like RSA Design Directions and the Audi Sustain our Nation Competition (now finished) are great ways to introduce and encourage more socially based projects looking at bigger issues. Could more competitions like this be introduced and be a compulsory part of every course to give students the insight and opportunity to stretch their use of design?
· Can design courses be four years, with the first two years focusing on developing creative thinking techniques and multi-disciplinary work, and the remaining years is when you specialise?
· Easier cross collaboration between university courses (like RCA and Imperial – business/ design) to create understanding between different sectors and allowing each to use skills in new ways.
· Integration of modules across both the curriculum and courses that focus on creative or design thinking module and also an analytical business strategy module that runs across all courses.
In summary, design education has a responsibility to be educating and produce graduates who are able to operate in the modern world. By no means do I think that design have all the answers to the huge challenges ahead. However, I do strongly believe that design can play a large role in helping to reshape and redesign key areas of society, innovate public services, and influence policy. But, there seems to be a struggle between being a creative thinker, or a highly skilled design practitioner.
Nurturing the creative and expansive thinking, and allowing graduates to understand their non tangible skills would help to create a far more flexible, confident and collaborative workforce who can adapt to the world around them, and maybe even help shape it.
It would be great to hear your thoughts and contributions so please comment and join the in conversation.
Aug 6th, Kevin Stone said:
Hi Joseph,
Great post! I couldn’t agree more with the overall sentiment, and the facilitation of more ‘social’ designers (social in terms of ‘social change’).
From my own perspective (as a bit of a misfit – being a UX designer, who in fact studied geography at university), I find 2 thoughts immediately come to mind in educating this breed of designer:
1) At what level are people be introduced to design as a tool/force for social change?
Whilst I fully agree that this should be included at University, I would also like to see it discussed more at college level (16-18), where designers/artists are perhaps less aware of the variety of directions that design can take someone, outside of the traditional design agency. (And indeed the scope of design, beyond simply a website/magazine/poster etc).
I feel, if the topic could be raised at college level, then it might help encourage young designers to explore new avenues.
And
2) With what subjects should design collaborate?
Currently, with ‘design thinking’ becoming more accepted in business circles, I feel that perhaps we are missing an opportunity for designers to fully explore what design is capable of.
Pairing business and design, will always be a vital relationship for any designer to learn, but at university when, like you mentioned, designers should have their view of design challenged, it would be great to see collaboration with departments other than business, such as social policy, international development or geography.
Admittedly, this could perhaps be asking too much in a relatively short period of time (i.e. the 3 years of university), but I fear that with the recession and rising cost of university education, students are beginning to focus more on the ability of getting a job upon leaving university, then many of the topics you outlined.
Aug 13th, Tobi Lawal said:
Hi Joe,
Great post!!!
This year I wrote an article about this exact problem, I interviewed Lesley Morris Head of Design skills to take her opinion of it. She reiterated the point that designers need to think differently and to place a greater emphasis on cross disciplinary teaching and working. Universities are also aware of this hence new courses such as St Martins MA in Innovation Management.
In regards to the majority of courses available and their content, industry moves at an electric pace, the tools, techniques and approaches are growing, changing and are constantly adapted. Indeed consultancies pride themselves on their ability adjust to their clients needs. However University courses are a totally different ball game. It can take years to construct a new course and/or months to make a change to a current one. Universities under the current format will struggle to keep up. Not only that, the lecturers that are likely to challenge and act as change agents have to present the changes to a panel that more often than not, just won’t get it. This would be down to the more traditionalistic views of design a an art and science based subject. Many universities require lectures to hold a Phd, as it takes about 4 years to complete, alongside the fact that many approaches are niche of not very old there aren’t that many experts able to teach it.
Also much of the university curriculum comes from that of the research of the presiding lecturers. Everything taught has been evidenced and also evaluated. Which brings about another point, how do you evaluate the ever changing design industries approaches? How do you evaluate cross disciplinary working? I’m sure the answers are out there in one format or another, or indeed they are being researched at the moment. But the structure of design education is not by any means a perfect match to design industry.
I started Brunel in 2005 and finished this year after a 5 year Masters. When they designed the course in lets say 2000 and perhaps adjusted it in early 2005 there was and is no way they could have predicted the trends of industry, it is then the responsibility of the lecturer of the moment and the student to proactively gain the required additional skills and experience, much like I have. It is not a compulsory part of the curriculum at least not yet.
I also attended New Designers and my project Designer Councils, which looked at how to increase the use of design as a form of strategy within local government didn’t make it. It is an A grade piece of work and I used much of the newer approaches to design, whilst having to work in a strategic manner. New Designers is not about that.
New Designers doesn’t have a predominate focus on Design but on Art and Craft. Most winners of awards had produced beautiful pieces, pieces of craft(a key aspect of design) but crucially not design.
The key difference here is evaluation, good design is evaluated against a set of criteria good craftsmanship is beautiful piece of work. Many of those pieces could not me mass or even batch manufactured without real difficulty, how could they have been user led or centered in their creation? What process of design did they use?
The definition of design is broad and there are still many questions, is it art? is it science? what makes up the design process? How do you measure it?
I do believe education is catching up, but there will always be a gap between industry mainly because industry can take more risks, also if the client is happy then there isn’t a need to evaluate at times because that is the evaluation!
To produce the “right” type of graduate industry needs to feed in more, more live projects led by industry and not just the setting of a brief. thinkpublics The Real Work Experience is a great example of how companies can get involved. This real exposure of the type that you would usually get from work experience must to be brought into the educational environment and not just left to academics. This is not an overall solution but I think it would act as a great first step.
Tobi
Aug 18th, Ivo said:
You’re right about the connection between design courses and the real world – I think is the aspect of design education that needs the most work. I do not agree about encouraging ‘bigger’ thoughts – there are plenty of designers who think outside the brief but then produce something completely useless. I like the idea of design students connecting ‘Dott – style’ with the community around them and finding out for themselves what their skills are and what they’re useful for.
Aug 18th, Joe said:
On that note- this would be a great opportunity for design students/ recent graduates to use there skills for a charity focused on social change.
http://www.mybnk.org/pzMedia/uploads/EntityFieldFile/f76aa31b-ff80-4021-b06a-32a9dc9e78dc.pdf
Sep 10th, Francisca said:
Dear Joe and Tobi,
I think the good news is, at least to some extent, that education is becoming more aware of this.
Has you said, it takes years and years to shape a course. I am 3rd year BA student and luckily or unluckily, I was part of the first class of a new course responding to some of these ideas (BA Graphic Product Innovation at LCC).
This course searches for at lot of things mentioned here such as transferable skills (through student-to-student workshops), make students aware of the design process and a lot of multi-disciplinary work.
Now, I know the course is it its initial steps of shaping itself but time seems to be very short for so many areas and collaborations to be explored. On the other hand, I believe that this will be of great use. I think this is a great degree and it makes you think about the importance of your role as a designer.
The downside of this is that arts and crafts and ‘basic/traditional’ design skills can be left behind sacrificed by innovation. Will there be a problem for us to learn our ‘traditional’ and basic skills in our own free time? I think it took us a while to realise that that’s what we needed to be doing…
In any case this it seems to be hard to respond to a market which expects basic designers skills first and then the good thinking after(?)
There seems to be a balance which needs to be brought up by education about what should come first in education: arts and crafts or innovative and multi-disciplinary design.
My wish is that these actually come together in one. It would be nice if there was time for all in a 3 year BA.
Francisca