Dear Chris,
I put the 'hired gun' quote on my door in big and bold. No offence taken, of
course. I like comic exaggeration, puns and word plays - and I know you are
growing your own...
I don't know whether or not everybody is a designer - maybe I would limit
designing to the creative and intellectual practice of producing and
structuring. This is not a definition just a thought. But I think the
elements of creativity and consciousness are central. Perhaps it should be a
professional practice also. My point is that designers seem to be claiming
still more ground for designing. I think that¹s fine, but an education in
product design does not give you the competences required to do just
anything.
My vision is that design education will change so that designers might play
a much more substantial role. This also answers the question you asked me in
a private mail:
"As you say, you do design, and in those terms everybody is a designer. So
what is the value of a professional designer and the education they have
received?"
Product designers and visual communication designers each have their
expertise. And there lies their value, obviously. They identify and solve
design problems. The moment, however, the definition of what is a design
problem comes to include making tax systems, establishing research methods
and concepts, solving the problems on the UN list of main priorities, as
Peter Buttenschön suggested at Common Ground, then, in my view, we move
beyond the main competences taught in today's design schools.
I don't think design education - in product design and visual communication
- should change that much, necessarily. At DDS, the new BA-program is
interdisciplinary for the most part and we have added a course in design
theory and methodology at undergraduate level. This course runs for 5
semesters and adds up to 35 ECTS points (the whole BA program is 180
points). There is a 600 page curriculum and a paper submission every
semester. This might seem radical, but then again - it boils down to one day
a week, dedicated to the theoretical approaches to design.
The intention is to equip our students with better means to identify and
solve problems. To build their skills in verbalizing design thinking - and
thus to communicate with people in all parts of the food chain of design -
including management, manufacturing, marketing, engineering, research and
end users. And it will provide our students with the means necessary to
engage in research at a later point.
We hope to be growing our own, too. And, in practice based research and
artistic practice, we will - very soon - if not from within DDS then at
least from within the design community, since all new research positions at
DDS are going to be publicly announced. But in basic and applied research
and in our Ph.D. program, we will have to rely on our pusher for years to
come.
Best regards,
thomas
|