Thanks Gunnar. I'm with Gunnar on this.
The primary value of teaching history is as a corrective of bias. This role
is especially important in educating professionals.
For example, for engineering design students that think design is only
engineering calculations, design educators can use history to show the
importance and existence of other design approaches that focus more on
human issues including aesthetics.
Similarly, for graphic designers who believe that design is only visual, a
design educators can use history to show the contribution and development of
technical design fields.
For design students who believe design originated in Europe and America,
design educators can use design history to show prior design developments in
the Middle East, Asia and elsewhere.
For design students who believe that currently design theory and knowledge
is at a peak, deign educators can use an historical perspective to show how
we are still discovering the meaning of more advanced design theories
developed long ago in regions such as the Middle East.
For design students who believe current design approaches will help make the
world a better place, design educators can use historical examples to show
how similarly strongly-held beliefs led to designers making the world a
worse place.
For design students believing in particular approaches to using design to
solve environmental problems, design educators can use history to show the
importance of questioning such beliefs and can offer tools to do so.
For design students embedded in the parochially-limiting and prejudiced
design literatures of most design fields, design educators can use history
to enable them to more sensitively see and understand the biases and the
adverse effects on themselves and the ways their design activity can
adversely affect others.
For design students that think they already know how to design things,
design educators can use history to show how the student needs a broader
field of design competence and understanding.
Design students consciousness about theory issues such as theoretical
definitions of design and other concepts can be raised and developed by
design educators use of historical correctives to their point of view.
There are more.
It is a waste of time to use history to teach content and design knowledge.
That can almost always be done more effectively via theory and empirical
practice.
I suggest the main value in teaching design history is as a corrective of
individual and group bias in thinking and beliefs about design activity,
and, as Gunnar suggested, tailored carefully by design educators to
specific student groups.
Best wishes,
Terence
==
Dr Terence Love, FDRS, AMIMechE, PMACM, MISI
PhD, B.A. (Hons) Eng, P.G.C.E
School of Design and Art, Curtin University, Western Australia
Psychology and Social Science, Edith Cowan University, Western Australia
Honorary Fellow, IEED, Management School, Lancaster University, UK
PO Box 226, Quinns Rocks, Western Australia 6030
[log in to unmask] +61 (0)4 3497 5848
==
Gunnar Wrote
"The problem is in the article: "*The* history of design" is, of course, a
nonsense phrase. You can teach *a* history of design but what history you
teach should depend on why you're teaching it.
... Nobody asks why this is a class for and of design students rather than,
say psychobiology students or hotel management students. ... it is worth
asking "What history of design would be worthwhile for the design students
(assuming they are design students) who will be taking this class (and why
wouldn't they get more value taking some other class instead)?"
|