Mike (mostly), Gunnar, and list
On 20/02/2018, 15:32, Paul Mike Zender" <[log in to unmask] wrote:
-snip-
>He [Mike's son] mentioned that they still design products and services
>but that this is only about 20% or less of their design effort. The rest
>of their design effort is research, analysis, design with a big D
>(strategy, innovation, concept), and reporting to management [] [t]hey
>are living reality that AIGA calls for in 2025 [] they don't design
>final brand or identities nor do they implement brands through design of
>a branding guide. They work at the strategic level before brand
>implementation.
-snip-
In outlining undergraduate competencies, the AIGA documentation utilise
Christopher Alexanderıs terminology about goodness of fit between form
and contextı, seemingly emphasising a future with greater importance on
context. If your [Mikeıs] sonıs firm is what AIGA call for in 2025
something they refer to as 'Communication Design', is it reasonable to
imply that 20% of design effort is be directed towards designing 'products
and services' (e.g. the form) and the other 80% is about 'research,
analysis ... strategy, innovation, concept (e.g. the context)?
A few questions:
If so, is this balance reflected in a typical undergraduate Communication
Design programme in the US? Do students spend 80% of their time on
learning about big Dı things such as research, strategy, innovation,
concept, for what you say are 'large systemic problemsı, and less time on
understanding form?
And in your comment 'Graphic Design is now a sub specialty of
Communication Design. What was a whole has become one partı, are you
seeing graphic design as the product or serviceı. Although it might be
reasonably assumed that graphic design functions as an aspect of
communication, is this always within a professional Communication Designı
scenario, as it is defined by AIGA and your subsequent comments?
Iım asking these questions because Iım currently in discussion with
academics in Europe and Australia about issues closely related to this
thread, and it would be helpful to hear a view from the US. Iım also
curious because Iım involved in a Graphic Design Educatorsı Network and
one of its aims is to respect a plurality of practiceı. In doing so, we
are trying to understand similarities and differences between different
domain names.
In simpler terms, my children are both at the age of making the transition
between high school and university. Hypothetically, if I were a parent in
the US visiting the various institutions with my child, who may be good at
ıthinking through making / research through design', Iım wondering what
the difference might be, in terms of curriculum content, between studying
Communication Design at Cincinnati compared to studying Graphic Design at
East Carolina University, where Gunnar teaches. I assume both are four
year programmes. Do students at the former place greater emphasis on the
context, and the latter greater emphasis on the form? (Thatıs the
impression I have from the various parts of this discussion). Or is this
just too simplistic an interpretation for a parent to understand? How
might you explain it to a parent?
Regards,
Robert
Loughborough University
>
-----------------------------------------------------------------
PhD-Design mailing list <[log in to unmask]>
Discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design
Subscribe or Unsubscribe at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/phd-design
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|