Dear Prashant,
There are really three questions here.
The first question is historical.
>If Mathematics has such an important role to play then why is it not given
>high importance in Design Schools Curriculum worldwide.
Mathematics was not taught in the craft-based schools of art and design from
which contemporary art and design schools descended. This is the main reason
it is not found in the curriculum of many design schools.
Some design schools DO include mathematics in the curriculum. This includes
schools that teach design subjects that require mathematically-oriented design
work. Software design, informatics, engineering design, ergonomics, and other
subjects would be examples of this. Another case would be schools with a
strong general education component. In these schools, all students are required
to study certain basic subjects. Design students, physics students,
music students,
literature students, and all others are required to take basic
courses in several
fields before they are promoted from the lower division to the upper division.
This is more common in North America than in Europe, where students enter
a professional stream at a far earlier stage.
The second question involves the nature of specific schools.
>Even the students in many countries are given the impression that if you are
>bad in Mathematics, then there is a fairly good chance that you are good in
>Creativity.
>Such biased opinions and the non-inclusion of Mathematics in Entrance
>Examinations and Eligibility conditions for many Design Schools lead to many
>creative professionals having a high amount of negative thinking about
>Mathematics. Due to this they are missing out on such a wonderful source of
>Creativity.
It is probable that design students in some fields of design may not need
mathematics. As Peter pointed out, there are traditions of model-making and
direct engagement with artifacts that work in different ways.
Craft-based design
skills remain a strong tradition in many places, and including mathematics in
the entrance requirements for all schools and all tracks would close the design
field to many talented candidates.
There is no necessary relationship between skill in mathematics and the skills
or traits identified with creative professions. As with many skills
and qualities,
people seem to have them in different mixes and proportions. People's skills
also change over the years with context, use, and engagement. I lack skills I
once had, grown rusty for disuse and the fact that I have fallen behind. I have
developed new skills through practice and regular engagement.
I advocate making room for everyone to enrich the field and the skills base in
a robust, pluralistic mode.
>So should not a higher than basic course on Mathematics be part of
>Foundation Program of all Design Schools.
While I'd argue against an absolute requirement for all design schools, I agree
with your point. Mathematics and the opportunity to study mathematics should
play a far greater role in the design school curriculum than it does
today. This
is the case for several subjects.
This argument requires a warning label. When we add new subjects to the
curriculum, we must also add teaching staff, and we must reshape other
areas of the curriculum to reflect shifting opportunities and priorities.
Highly technical skills require talented teachers to coach students who come
to new subject areas with varied backgrounds and levels of ability. This places
significant demands on a school in terms of curriculum planning, staffing,
and the budgeting that supports teaching staff required to undertake the kinds
of coaching and advisory work that this would engender.
Best regards,
Ken
>regards
>Prashant
>NID, India
>
--
Ken Friedman
Professor of Leadership and Strategic Design
Department of Leadership and Organization
Norwegian School of Management
Design Research Center
Denmark's Design School
email: [log in to unmask]
|