DESIGN EDUCATION: A DIALOGUE ACROSS CULTURES
Following the coming Icograda "Identity/Integrity" conference (Brno, 18-19 June, 2002), an education symposium will take place at which Icograda's Education Network will be launched. While educators and design professionals are awaiting this event, it may be interesting to read about the results of a recent conference discussing a largely similar set of issues.
The conference Design Education: A Dialogue Across Cultures took place at the Department of Visual Communication Design, University of Split (Croatia) between February 28 and March 2, 2002. It was organized by the British Council Zagreb and several Croatian design education organizations, and premised on the belief that design educators have a lot to learn from one another, although they are working in radically different contexts and although successful design education entails rather different processes in different parts of the world.
The conference organizers felt
that, in spite of the globalizing tendencies, there still existed
design production reflecting local needs, following local traditions,
and resolving locally specific communication problems. The premise was
also that this situation was reflected in the process of design
education, more often than not linked to the very specific conditions
of individual countries and regions.
Twenty five designers
and educators from areas ranging from classical graphic design to new
media contributed papers and lectures on teaching and learning methods
in various fields of design education, skill requirements of design
graduates, the role of business in design education, and new areas of
study in design research. Several general conclusions crystallized in
formal and informal discussions accompanying the papers. They could be
summarized as follows:
Diversity of contexts and methods
Design
education nowadays takes place in contexts so diverse that they require
different educational methods. Participants from transition countries
felt that issues they should address in teaching differ somewhat from
those emphasized by their European and North American counterparts.
While discussion of ethical issues in design has steadily been gaining
in importance outside of the transition context as well, one cannot
overemphasize the need for an analysis of wider social trends in the
countries in which, to put it symbolically, it is often a problem for
educators not only to discuss what is politically correct, but to
explain what political correctness is in the first place.
To
be able to design effectively and behave humanly, as well as meet the
professional criteria that are sooner or later going to become a
standard in what is currently the transition context, students need to
be exposed to much more than an education based on mastering the formal
skills. This can be done by increasing the quantity and quality of
so-called contextual studies
in the curriculum, as well as by
guest lectures and workshops led by design practitioners from countries
with a developed civil society. On the whole, the participants from
transition countries emphasized the role of education in raising the
level of quality of design production and saw educational institutions
as the place where the integration of business and community concerns
can begin.
Design is an intellectual activity
The
discussions that took place at the conference confirm Icograda's
definition of graphic design as an intellectual, technical and creative
activity concerned not simply with the production of images but with
the analysis, organization and methods of presentation of visual
solutions to communication problems. The issues addressed and problems
encountered in design activity are so complex they frequently require a
scholarly approach and application of highly sophisticated
methodologies. While designers cannot be expected to be conversant with
and apply these methodologies from various fields in their work on
their own, they should get acquainted with diverse intellectual
approaches to problem-solving in the course of their education.
Design
activity nowadays requires intensive interdisciplinary collaboration
and the nature of this collaboration should be mirrored in design
education. This holds true for both course work and internal
organization of design education institutions, which should draw on
multiple resources of the universities they are part of.
The
result of design education should be a "thinking designer", equally
skilled in form-making and visual analysis prerequisite for
problem-solving. Analytical attention should not only be directed
toward anticipated problems of the future: the research of design
tradition is a useful exercise in the understanding of constant
formative values.
Design education should be critical
Design
education should be critical of the existing design practice and social
and cultural circumstances it takes place in. Educational institutions
are places where critical dialogue and a thorough examination of the
needs and problems of contemporary society should be encouraged. This
aspect of design education plays a vital public role, and it should
therefore more than is now the case be supported by the public funding
bodies.
It is of special importance to develop critical
discourse in the field of new media design, which is still evolving at
a very fast pace and confronts us with previously unknown social and
cultural arrangements. The critical discourse generated in the
institutions of design education should be made available to the public
outside them as well. This can be done not only by organizing
presentations and festivals open to the public, but also by a creative
use of the equipment developed primarily for business purposes.
Design education should emphasize creativity but also address employment issues
Creative
modelling relationship is of high relevance to design capability, and
great attention should consequently be devoted to it in the course of a
student's design education. In contrast with the 1970s, nowadays it is
not realistic anymore to discuss the design process as though it was a
definitive process that designers merely have to apply. Designing has
become a highly personalized activity: to standardize it would be to
destroy much of its creative power.
Creative approach to
design should not only be encouraged at the specialized institutions of
higher learning. It should become an important component of general
education as well. There it could serve as a basis for developing
transferable employment skills that will be needed in any walk of life.
Design education should be seriously concerned with employment
issues. In the course of their design studies, students should get
instruction or gain a direct experience on how to sell their work,
estimate how much their work is worth, and how they can fit in a large
company design team or survive on the market as free lance designers.
Information on this aspect of design activity should be collected by
educational and professional associations, and then be well advertised
and distributed in schools to help the newcomers make a start on the
market. Design education institutions, as well as senior design
professionals, should also be actively engaged in client education.
About the Author
Mirko Petric teaches media literacy and semiotics in the Department of
Visual Communication Design, Art Academy, University of Split
(Croatia). He served as conference coordinator of Design Education: A
Dialogue Across Cultures (February 28-March 2, 2002). The presented
account of the results of the conference represents his own views. A
detailed conference program and information on the content of
individual papers can be found online.