##common.pageHeaderLogo.altText##

Articles

No. 2(23) (2022): Culture of Design

Why People Who Are Not Designers Should Be Taught Design and How

Submitted
1 July 2022
Published
09-10-2023

Abstract

Currently, the system of design education faces the challenge of redefining the possible scope and ways of educating future designers. The complexity of the world around us, both in the technological and geopolitical dimensions, as well as tasks related to climate protection and public health, pose entirely new challenges to the practice of design. A distinctive voice in regard to criticism of design education is the “Future of Design Education” project, which was strengthened by Donald Norman and Paul A. Kirschner’s famous text titled “The Teaching and Learning of Design.” Norman and Kirschner noticed a fundamental deficit in the education of designers in regard to their compatibility with so-called modernity: its complexity and challenges. In addition, the authors pointed to the lack of an interdisciplinary environment of knowledge, competence, and skills in educating future designers. The “Future of Design Education” initiative is an open forum for the exchange of ideas and experiences in design education – its goal is to try to rethink and redesign design education. The mere appearance of such an initiative allows us to draw two conclusions: (1) the design community has noticed deficits in the education system; (2) the design environment is self-reflective when attempting change through design. Design has changed from being goal-oriented to being criterion-oriented – the object of design is no longer the object but its usability, accessibility, or serviceability. In design, the context of products, services, or communication becomes crucial – contemporary education in the field of design should therefore focus on a holistic approach to design methodology and should supplement education with social, technical, economic, and environmental contexts. The design community’s current discussion on redesigning design education seems crucial. However, it is closed to the external perspective – interdisciplinarity, which is emphasised at every step in the theoretical sense, although it is not commonly used in ongoing discussions. The text addresses an even broader issue: teaching design to non-designers, thinking about design as a superior problem-solving competence and seeing designers as moderators and animators of social change.

References

  1. Aicher O. 1994. The World as Design, red. A. Menges, Ernst & Sohn.
  2. Brown T., Katz B. 2009. Change by Design: How Design Thinking Transforms Organizations and Inspires Innovation, Harper Business.
  3. Burke C., Könings K.D. 2016. Recovering Lost Histories of Educational Design: A Case Study in Contemporary Participatory Strategies, „Oxford Review of Education” 42, nr 6, s. 721–732, https://doi.org/10.1080/03054985.2016.1232244.
  4. Cunliffe-Charlesworth H. 1991. The Royal College of Art : Its Influence on Education, Art and Design 1900–1950, Sheffield City Polytechnic. http://shura.shu.ac.uk/3144/; dostęp: 8.01.2022.
  5. Davis M. 2017. Teaching Design: A Guide to Curriculum and Pedagogy for College Design Faculty and Teachers Who Use Design in Their Classrooms, Allworth.
  6. Droste M. 2006. Bauhaus, Taschen. https://www.alibris.com/search/books/isbn/9783822850022; dostęp: 8.01.2022.
  7. Drucker P.F. 2012. The Practice of Management, Routledge. https://www.scribd.com/book/163567585/The-Practice-of-Management; dostęp: 8.01.2022.
  8. Ehn P. 1998. Manifesto for a Digital Bauhaus, „Digital Creativity” 9, nr 4, s. 207–217, https://doi.org/10.1080/14626269808567128.
  9. Esslinger H. 2012. Design Forward: Creative Strategies for Sustainable Change, Arnoldsche.
  10. Frascara J. 2020. Design Education, Training, and the Broad Picture: Eight Experts Respond to a Few Questions, „She Ji: The Journal of Design, Economics, and Innovation” 6 , nr 1, s. 106–117, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sheji.2019.12.003.
  11. Friedman K, Yongqi L., Jin M. 2020. “She Ji”: The Next Five Years, „She Ji: The Journal of Design, Economics, and Innovation” 6, nr 1, s. 1-4, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sheji.2020.02.002.
  12. Future of Design Education. 2022. The Future of Design Education Initiative. https://www.futureofdesigneducation.org/about; dostęp: 8.01.2022.
  13. Ghajargar M., Bardzell J. 2019. What Design Education Tells Us about Design Theory: A Pedagogical Genealogy, „Digital Creativity” 30, nr 4, s. 277–299,
  14. https://doi.org/10.1080/14626268.2019.1677723.
  15. Hagan M. 2020. Legal Design as a Thing: A Theory of Change and a Set of Methods to Craft a Human-Centered Legal System, „Design Issues” 36, nr 3, s. 3–15, https://doi.org/10.1162/desi_a_00600.
  16. Johnston D.L. 1978. Scientists Become Managers – the ‘T’-shaped man, „IEEE Engineering Management Review” 6, nr 3, s. 67–68.
  17. Kelley T., Kelley D. 2013. Creative Confidence: Unleashing the Creative Potential within Us All, Currency.
  18. Kirschner P.A., Norman D. 2018. Promoting Argumentation Competence: Extending from First- to Second-Order Scaffolding Through Adaptive Fading, „Educational Psychology Review” 30, nr 1, s. 153–176, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-017-9400-z.
  19. Kleinman Z. 2018. Cambridge Analytica: The Story So Far, „BBC News” 21.03, sekcja Technolog y. https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-43465968; dostęp: 8.01.2022.
  20. Kunz W., Rittel H.W. 1972. Information Science: On the Structure of Its Problems, „Information Storage and Retrieva” 8, nr 2, s. 95–98.
  21. Lees-Maffei G., Houze R., red. 2010. The Design History Reader, Berg Publishers.
  22. Manzini E. 2014. Making Things Happen: Social Innovation and Design, „Design Issues” 30, nr 1, s. 57–66, https://doi.org/10.1162/DESI_a_00248.
  23. Meyer M.W., Norman D. 2020. Changing Design Education for the 21st Century, „She Ji: The Journal of Design, Economics, and Innovation” 6, nr 1, s. 13–49, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sheji.2019.12.002.
  24. Norman D., Kirschner P.A. 2021. The Teaching and Learning of Design. https://www.kirschnered.nl/2021/04/18/the-teaching-and-learning-of-design/; dostęp: 8.01.2022.
  25. Papanek V., Buckminster Fuller R. 1972. Design for the Real World, Thames and Hudson.
  26. The Parsons New School. 1977. The Parsons New School. 1976, t. 34. The Parsons New School Bulletin, The New School.
  27. Rand P. 2014. Thoughts on Design, Chronicle Books.
  28. Rashdall H. 1895. The Universities of Europe in the Middle Ages, The Clarendon Press. http://archive.org/details/universitieseur01unkngoog; dostęp: 8.01.2022.
  29. Rawsthorn A. 2013. Hello World: Where Design Meets Life, Hamish Hamilton UK.
  30. Rittel H.W.J., Webber M.M. 1973. Dilemmas in a General Theory of Planning, „Policy Sciences” 4, nr 2, s. 155–169, https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01405730.
  31. Schön D.A. 1991. The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action. https://www.routledge.com/The-Reflective-Practitioner-How-Professionals-Think-in-Action/Schon/p/book/9781857423198; dostęp: 8.01.2022.
  32. Spee J., Mccormick D. 2012. The Design Ethos of Dieter Rams and Its Implications for Organizations and Management Education, „Academy of Management Proceedings”, lipiec, art. 12772, https://doi.org/10.5465/AMBPP.2012.12772abstract.
  33. Sudjic D. 2009. The Language of Things: [Design, Luxury, Fashion, Art: How We Are Seduced by the Objects around Us], Penguin.
  34. Taylor N. 1998. Urban Planning Theory Since 1945, Sage, https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446218648.
  35. Voûte E., Stappers P.J., Giaccardi E., Mooij S., Boeijen A. van. 2020. Innovating a Large Design Education Program at a University of Technolog y, „She Ji: The Journal of Design, Economics, and Innovation” 6, nr 1, s. 50–66, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sheji.2019.12.001.
  36. Wszołek M. 2021. Teoria i praktyka projektowania (komunikacji), Wydawnictwo Libron.
  37. Wszołek M., Płuchowska D. 2021. To Teach Legal Design – Change Design By Design, „International Journal of English and Cultural Studies” 4, nr 1, s. 45–49.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.