JiscMail Logo
Email discussion lists for the UK Education and Research communities

Help for PHD-DESIGN Archives


PHD-DESIGN Archives

PHD-DESIGN Archives


PHD-DESIGN@JISCMAIL.AC.UK


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

PHD-DESIGN Home

PHD-DESIGN Home

PHD-DESIGN  2003

PHD-DESIGN 2003

Options

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Post New Message

Post New Message

Newsletter Templates

Newsletter Templates

Log Out

Log Out

Change Password

Change Password

Subject:

Comments on session 5: UCI School of Design Proposal

From:

Al Selvin <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

[log in to unmask]

Date:

Fri, 12 Dec 2003 08:13:05 -0500

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (152 lines)

Reply

Reply

First some disclaimers. I'm grateful to Ken for the invitation and the
introduction, but I have to say I demurred at first. I don't have any
special insight into the field of design education and I'm not very close
to issues about academic funding and institution-building. I'll comment as
I'm able -- mostly from the perspective of someone who manages web and user
interface (UI) designers in a corporate context, and as a UI designer (to
some degree) myself both now and in the past (note: as a researcher my
interests overlap with many of those articulated on this list, but are
probably more outside its scope than in, and I don't comment here from my
research perspective). I don't consider myself primarily a designer, nor do
I consider the main work of the group of about 50 people I now manage to be
"design" per se (though there is certainly quite a lot of design going on
in the group -- of user interfaces, of web content, of software, of
web-based training courses, of computing architecture, etc).

With that out of the way, here are some reflections on things that struck
me in Michael Clark's address. As a whole I find the conception of the UCI
SoD to be an admirable and exciting thing, and none of the comments I make
below should be read as criticisms of the proposal as a whole. I have tried
not to trod over the same ground as my fellow commentators, sticking mostly
to a few observations from a professional/corporate/employer standpoint.

=====

Prof. Clark writes: "I have no background in the field of design.  I am a
Professor of English and Comparative Literature, with a focus on literary
theory and on the literature of British colonialism in the Americas."

I also don't have an academic background in design. It might be of some
relevance to describe how I arrived at the relatively design-intensive
career I have fallen into. As stated in the intro, I studied film and video
as an undergraduate. At Michigan in the early 80s, the Film/Video Studies
major was a largely interdisciplinary humanities program, so I took many
courses in literature, philosophy, and history of art, as well as film
theory and the like. In fact film/video production itself was only a small
part of the overall program, though I also worked part-time in an
educational TV studio. Graduate school at Wisconsin was a similar mix,
again with not much applied study in production; mostly I studied
telecommunications policy and the sociology of economic change. Yet in both
programs I kept active in some degree of hands-on work that might be
characterized as "design" -- a video course here, hosting shows at the
student radio station there, composing music and playing in various bands,
and so on.

This autobiography is to this point: when I began working professionally in
the mid-80s, developing technical communication materials and designing
user interfaces, somehow my background seemed to prepare me well. Without
making any direct correspondences or drawing in any straightforward way on
my education, I was able to meld in to the world of corporate computing.
Without an engineering or design background, I found the process of
thinking about what made sense and what would work from a design
perspective to be "natural," seeming to be a logical extension of the kind
of thought, analysis, and practice I had learned in film, video, and the
humanities (and, no doubt, picked up from the culture at large -- for
example, I learned how to organize my physical desk on my first post-M. A.
job by studying the way folders and files were organized on the 1984
Macintosh computer "desktop").

I have since found that many in the UI and web design worlds have similar
interdisciplinary backgrounds, sharing usually at least some creative
interest and practice in their past (musicians, writers, filmmakers, etc.),
but without formal design training.

If this seems to be heading toward some sort of argument like "design
schools aren't necessary for a career in design," that's not my intent.
Rather, I wondered when I read the piece if the correspondence between the
UCI SoD and the world of professional design wasn't being made too direct,
too one-to-one -- that is, that the purpose of a design school is to
produce professional designers and design researchers. Is it necessary to
justify the school in this vocational manner? Perhaps so.

I see the same issue where Prof. Clark writes:    " a general recognition
by prospective employers/clients/users of the value of that knowledge and
training for professional practice as well as for academic research."
Maybe the culture is heading toward this point. But in the professional
world I've been living in, and as someone who hires designers, whether
prospects have a direct educational background in design is not all that
relevant. What matters is the work that the person is able to show, the way
they are able to talk about what they do and how they approach problems,
the ways they find to be effective in the often turbulent milieu we work
in.  How they got there is of less interest. The other aspects that Prof.
Clark describes, of the SoD opening doors to academic (and professional)
collaborations and intersections that wouldn't be there otherwise, seem
much more compelling to me than the fact that the school could produce
professional designers. (Of course, if it does so that is an excellent
thing).

=====

Prof. Clark writes: "Michael Schrage in his book Serious Play  claims the
Media Lab at MIT grew out of the inability of existing programs at MIT to
contain the interests and curiosity and work-processes (serious play) of
some faculty and students related to design, and he says that much work in
the Media Lab does in fact exist in the interstices of more conventional
academic programs as embodied at MIT."

This troubled me somewhat, not because of the validity of the point, but
rather the use of the Media Lab as a model. After the wildfire success of
its early years, from news reports (1)  it seems to have fallen victim to
over-reaching and some degree of infighting. Certainly the Media Lab arose
from the kinds of energy Schrage described, but this does not seem to have
been a sustainable model. Has there been consideration given to
"sustainability" as a criteria for the SoD? I know there is discussion of
the sustainability of the funding model, but how about for its internal
culture?
                                                                            
 =====                                                                      
                                                                            
 Prof. Clark writes: "contrary to its critics, design as an academic field  
 is not simply a little of this and a little of that ("engineering lite" as 
 some engineers would                                                       
 say)." This, of course, is not just an issue in academia; it comes up in   
 the professional world as well. In the web/IT world, the perceived value   
 of design goes up and down. There are times when UI design, for example,   
 is at the forefront of concern, and times when it is regarded as a frill   
 and fluff. In a large company I know, several years ago there was a        
 director-level group concerned exclusively with the visual design of the   
 company's web presence. This group arose, acted, and was disbanded and its 
 director and members laid off, all in the space of little over a year.  At 
 its zenith it had senior executive attention and made grand presentations  
 on the urgent and central nature of its work, on how critical brand as     
 reflected in web design was to the company's mission. When it disappeared, 
 cost and engineering considerations once again had center stage for the    
 company's web presence, and the visual design of its many different web    
 sites did indeed begin to fragment -- but without any discernible impact   
 on the company's business. I guess what I am wondering about is the        
 potential for hubris to take over value. Statements about how design will  
 be the center of the world (of course, I am making a caricature here) seem 
 to me to lean in this direction.                                           
                                                                            
 I like better statements like the "integrative power of design as a        
 conceptual process" and "the extent to which the field of design has begun 
 to encourage self-reflection and commentary on process and the             
 philosophical bases of its practices as a way of integrating the various   
 disciplines that intersect in many design projects." I hope the            
 "integration" will include study of how design activities play out in the  
 social systems of actual workplaces, and how designers must negotiate and  
 find ways to integrate their contributions with those of engineering,      
 finance, and other disciplines, in such a way that the value is            
 self-evident, without recourse to statements about the transcendent value  
 of design.                                                                 
                                                                            



Al Selvin

=====
Notes:

(1) "Struggling to Regain Technological Buzz After Bubble's Burst," New
York Times, March 29, 2003

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

JiscMail Tools


RSS Feeds and Sharing


Advanced Options


Archives

March 2024
February 2024
January 2024
December 2023
November 2023
October 2023
September 2023
August 2023
July 2023
June 2023
May 2023
April 2023
March 2023
February 2023
January 2023
December 2022
November 2022
October 2022
September 2022
August 2022
July 2022
June 2022
May 2022
April 2022
March 2022
February 2022
January 2022
December 2021
November 2021
October 2021
September 2021
August 2021
July 2021
June 2021
May 2021
April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
2006
2005
2004
2003
2002
2001
2000
1999
1998


JiscMail is a Jisc service.

View our service policies at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/ and Jisc's privacy policy at https://www.jisc.ac.uk/website/privacy-notice

For help and support help@jisc.ac.uk

Secured by F-Secure Anti-Virus CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager