In a message dated 05/30/2000 3:42:49 AM Pacific Daylight Time, 
[log in to unmask] writes:

<< J.W.  Ken, I think you stretch this metaphor much further than is helpful,
 unless you want us to return to a mediaeval world. Despite the fact that
 our discussion began with issues of tradition, we now live in time when
 habits of inquiry and research, writing and publication, observation and
 representation,  etc are all still being revolutionised by new approaches
 and ideas. Whether we like it or not, technology is eating the Book, and
 the Book is largely what kept disciplines so dangerously separate. I doubt
 whether either the Craft Guilds or the Monasteries are very helpful models
 from which to rethink the way we encourage learning and the exchange of new
 knowledge. I applaud your tenacity in defending valuable aspects of what
 has been developed, but we also need some radical thinking and a
 willingness to grasp the unthinkable. >>

I would agree. Much of the debate has been so divorced from what design is. 
Design is concerned with the future but much of the debate has been concerned 
only with the past. The argument has revolved around what the qualification 
should be called rather than the quality of the process of education. If the 
medieieval aime of the process was to develop a superior knowledge of the 
field, how this should be obtained should be what is debated, not the style 
of uniform worn at the end.

I know that this has not been entirely the case. There was Bryne's good 
outline of possible content of a degree oriented towards anthropology and 
Ken's outline of 200 areas relevant to design. But somehow design has been 
left out of the argument. If the key is making an original contribution to 
the field in the case of a Phd what constitutes an original contribution has 
some importance but the journey of enlightenment is what is more important 
(than the destination). The discussion calls to mind the old Christian story 
of the Moneychangers in the Temple. It seems that the educators are not 
focussed on education but more their official title in the "Temple."

Here in Silicon Valley the world is changing so quickly that to read senior 
educators discussing issues which have been inconclusively debated for 
several hundred years rather than concentrating on how education can 
contribute to help society cope with the accelerating level of change is 
disheartening.

With application to design practice education has an important relevance to 
society. If there is no connection I feel that its importance diminished. 
This group might as well drop the "d" in drs.


Rob Curedale
Senior Producer
frogdesign Silicon Valley

Rob [log in to unmask]
Cell:1818 292 0599


%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%