Closing Remarks: Charles Burnette

The intelligence and vision exhibited by those
involved with the proposal for the UC Irvine School of
Design and the comments it has engendered about
design, design education and design research have been
very interesting and encouraging.

I hope that as things unfold, the school will be
positioned, developed and marketed along the lines
articulated by Michael Clark. That is to say, as the
major University offering an education based on the
capacity within its school of design to generate new
forms of knowledge that are presently unknown, or
unappreciated. (To slightly reword his statement). No
other design school, to my knowledge, has as clear a
focus on and as strong a commitment to the creation of
new knowledge (although many are working to make it
happen within their institutions.

The practical implementation of such a mission can be
built on Michael’s remarks that “Design seems not only
to allow, but to actually require collaboration across
disciplinary boundaries, so it can serve as a nexus
that unites disparate areas of the university, and
that in itself will create more opportunities for
interdisciplinary work"...and
...”The integrative power of design as a conceptual
process should be
an object of knowledge in itself.”

I encourage you to develop a school that has designed
itself to focus on interdisciplinary collaboration
during the design development of humanistically and
environmentally beneficial artifacts and services
while developing new knowledge that would help to
improve the processes involved. I believe UC Irvine
should, from its inception, take the high road in
these areas and be a leader in interdisciplinary
design education and research. The clarity with which
its vision is presented will not only attract students
and faculty of the highest quality but will also
profoundly affect the field, serving notice that a new
perspective regarding design has emerged.

Design is grounded in the universal discipline of
purposeful thinking. It adds the objective of creating
something new, appropriate and valuable within the
circumstances it is focused on. That something need
not be restricted to material artifacts. Design
thinking can be applied to any subject, in any
context, at any level where there is a need or desire
to create something new and appropriate. While
acknowledging that there are domains of application in
which design thinking is embedded (architecture,
communication design, etc.) the school should focus on
universals (knowledge of designing) that can bridge
different subject disciplines. Research and coursework
should be built around the process of designing not
pre-existing subjects. (There will be many
subject-oriented courses elsewhere in the University.)
This is not to say that specialized knowledge and
expertise should be excluded from the school, rather
the opposite, that resources and people with expertise
relevant to the design task whatever it may be, coming
from the University and elsewhere, should be involved
in collaborative interdisciplinary
educational/research activity within the School of
Design. It will be important for the quality of the
learning experience to focus on worthwhile design
projects with an effective level of expert knowledge

The University must be realistic and find ways to
overcome patterns of academic advancement and
commitment that would work against faculty from other
schools participating in projects within the school of
design. It must also find ways to address the
commercial interests that often constrain projects
sponsored by industry and the lack of awareness of the
value of design thinking by foundations and government
agencies. All of these potential sources of support
have objectives that can be addressed through design,
but many of those who make funding decisions do not
understand designing or its potentials. It would be
wise to have a professional project
development/liaison person on the administrative staff
of the school (as Art Center has) to organize and
support design projects. Cognitive dissonance,
misunderstanding and resistance can also spring from
disciplines that articulate and practice designing in
their own ways. (Art, science, engineering,
management, etc.) Design schools have also been
expensive to operate and receive relatively little
economic support from alumni. Similarly,
Interdisciplinary teams are usually rather small and
both time and faculty intensive (especially if an
adequate range of expertise is represented on project
teams). Such interdisciplinary projects will be
expensive to support. All of these anticipated
difficulties can be overcome – through good design
thinking and diplomacy. It is worth the effort and
cost. Perhaps, an interdisciplinary design “breeder”
program could be launched to explore and develop the
paradigm before the school itself is created.

I sincerely hope that it will be possible to realize
the UCI School of Design, especially along an
interdisciplinary, project oriented model. I am sure
it would be an inspiration to us all.

In closing I would like to say that it has been a
pleasure to participate in this conference. I carry
away many new thoughts. Thanks to all, especially to
Ken for his tremendous efforts to broaden the
discourse on design education and research. He has
been successful!

Charles Burnette

Dr. Charles Burnette
234 South Third Street
Philadelphia, PA 19106
Tel: +215 629 1387
e-mail: [log in to unmask]