From Voice ~ Topics: college, professional development
What this Country Needs is a Good Five-Year Design Program
Of course this assertion contradicts prevailing beliefs. But, arguably, the increasing number of applications (particularly from graduating seniors) to the growing number of American graduate design programs is evidence that today’s BFA students are not entirely prepared (or confident) to function in a world of integrated practice and advanced technology. Let’s face it, a three-year education is old school.
Proficiency in requisite technologies, not to mention a slew of optional techniques, easily takes a year or more to master in a rudimentary way. Acquiring fluency in the design language(s), most notably type, is an ongoing process. Then there is instruction and practice in a variety of old and new media—print and web, editorial and advertising, static and motion, not to mention drawing and photography—these take time to learn, no less to hone. And what about the liberal arts: writing, history and criticism? Theory is also a useful foundation if taught correctly, but it is often perfunctorily shoehorned into studio classes. How can a design student function without verbal expertise, let alone the ability to read and research? This must also be taught in an efficient manner that takes time. And then there is basic business acumen; every designer must understand fundamental business procedures, which are virtually ignored in the ultimate pursuit of the marketable portfolio.
Whew, that’s a lot to accomplish in just three years. But, added to this are the necessary internships that also take chunks of time. Frankly, students should not be allowed to enter the field without a little real world experience under their belts. So shouldn’t there be time set aside for a few solid internships or work-abroad programs in addition to a strong course load?
The foundation year—traditionally an opportunity afforded to freshmen to sample a broad arts curricula—would serve students better if devoted instead to teaching the technologies and introducing languages endemic to graphic design.
Art and design schools that ostensibly begin to teach design majors in the second year have barely prepared their sophomores for design literacy. Foundation classes may offer some credits towards graduation, but what good are these credits if the knowledge has little bearing on the major? It is hard enough being merely competent these days, but fluency in type and conceptual thinking is so essential that more, not less, time must be devoted to it. Most sophomores, even those who excel in Adobe Photoshop, Illustrator, or In Design, are plunged into problem solving without the ability to parse the problems they are asked to solve. Sure, their instincts and skill-sets evolve over time, but in the truncated three-year timeframe there are greater chances that too many students will be left behind.The greatest single area of ignorance among students (and some professionals) is type and typography. It takes a sustained effort and practice to produce a type literate student who knows how to compose type, what type is designed to express, and the history of letterforms as design components. By the senior year too many students are still type novices, following superficial trends or rote traditions, and the portfolios prove that the standard for literacy is not as high as it might be. If nothing else, BFA graduates should flawlessly “speak” the language of type. Regrettably, claiming proficiency with computer programs seem to be more important.
Blame can sometimes be laid at the feet of instructors, but not always. How many times do good teachers lament the lack of time devoted to their specialty, or complain about the overall course work packed into a short time period that diverts student attention? In a three-year program the number of required classes (and credits) often exceed the ability of the student to be well taught, or at least to retain what they’ve studied.
Given the programmatic and bureaucratic intricacies of higher education, a five-year program is probably unrealistic, but not altogether impossible. One solution is to eliminate foundation. But more importantly, it is necessary for administrators to accept that twenty-first century pedagogy is more complex than before. More, not less, schooling is demanded in many fields today, especially design. At the same time, design students must not be encouraged to view graduate school as merely a two-year supplemental extension of their undergraduate education. MFA faculties should not have to teach remedial type or computer programs—leave that for continuing education classes. Rather MFA programs should offer an additional two (or three) years to analyze and research bigger ideas for which there is no opportunity in the workaday world. MFAs should be advanced options after certain levels of experience are attained. Undergraduate education should be a full plate of pedagogical necessities that prepare students to enter the design field.
Admittedly, five years is not a lot of time either, but it will enable teaching of technology and encourage its immediate integration into the design process in the freshman year. Furthermore, it will allow courses on history, criticism, and theory to be more than electives or add-ons (critical history should be a three year parallel track intersecting with studio practical classes). The added year(s) should allow for more advanced minors in interrelated subject areas. More time could also allow for longer and more varied internships as requirements towards graduation. Five years of dedicated design pedagogy will better prepare students to enter the workforce, where doubtless they will learn even more.
Undergraduate design education is not the last word in creating the good designer; work experience is essential. Yet more education accelerates professional growth. There are many terrific graduates emerging every year, but just think how many more there could be if graphic design education was not hampered by such a truncated production line. An extra year or two could make a big difference for everyone.
-
Right on, Steve. I've been thinking that 5 years is probably necessary for quite awhile, even before interactivity, motion and sound doubled the theory, methods and skills required of a graphic design BFA.
Deans always complain that their graphic design curriculum is too prescribed, without options for electives and enriching collaborations with other college programs. 5 years would produce designers with a broader cultural vision.
This is in synch with a broad societal trend. Longer life expectancies and careers beyond age 65 go along with extended adolescence and a slower entry into the work force.
The drawback, of course, is money. The cost of a 4-year undergraduate degree is already shocking. -
I very much agree with Steve's points, but have to say that most higher education institutions are attempting to actually get their students out in four years, as opposed to keeping them for a required fifth year. Students and their parents routinely complain about it taking more than the advertised four years to get through all sorts of undergraduate programs -- and not just in design.
As well, programs such as those in design with selective admission and sequential curricula (which are needed to effecively teach the subject) can contribute to the problem of students needing more than four years to graduate. For instance, if a student is denied admission to our program, they have to wait a year to apply again, which automatically puts them into a fifth year.
So, I guess that I'm saying that the issue is somewhat complex, and that many institutions are under pressure not to move in this direction. Perhaps an optional fifth year after the required four, such as what RISD offers, is a reasonable way to address this issue?
I also very much agree with Steve's comments on the foundation year. If it's a fine arts foundation, then it may very well be wasted time to an extent. If it's a design foundation, such as what we do here at Ohio State, then perhaps it's time better spent.
Thank you for the insights on design education, and the opportunity to comment.
Paul Nini, Associate Professor, Ohio State University, Department of Design -
I have a counter proposal. How about we eliminate design as an undergraduate major altogether and just offer it at a graduate level. That way, students will get the broad foundatational education that is required in order to be functional people (and functional designers) and those who go on to study design will be able to devote themselves to it entirely.
-
Thank you, Katherine McCoy, for adding the very necessary element of financial cost to this equation. Any discussion of extending a collegiate program must factor in money. Who will pay for that tantalizing fifth year? Are schools willing to provide five years of education for the cost of four? Are professors willing to take reduced salaries? Will the proposed fifth year raise job prospects and earnings such that students find it an economically viable option?
The longer life expectancy that McCoy points out also allows people to put off decisions of career direction. Many of Steven Heller’s suggestions would work extremely well for the student who, at a remarkably early age, has determined to commit herself or himself to a specific career track.
Community colleges offer students a relatively low-cost opportunity to develop foundation skills and career direction. Perhaps universities and art schools can work with them to accomplish some of Heller’s reasonable educational objectives at price that is relatively affordable. -
As a current undergraduate, I fully recognize the necessity of a 5 year program. It may vary with each university, but the amount of knowledge and hands on time that is needed to get a solid foundation is too much to be squeezed into 4 years.
B.F.A has become so impacted at my university, that i am afraid that this will cause them to almost rush to get us out in 4 years. I have chosen to stay 5 years, not because i dont know what i want to do, i am one of the lucky ones who have stuck with their career goals, but i want to stay to make sure that i get the most out of my college education.
The money part is definetly a problem, considering that any financial aid recieved ends after 4 years, which to me feels like the govt. along with other aspects of society, is giving us a choice "graduate in 4 years for cheap, or take 5 years and be broke."
Anyway, sorry for the long post, this topic hit home for me and im glad that somebody has had the insight to bring it to the public's eye. -
Justin
You might add a P.S.
How does the school respond to your voluntarily staying one extra year? And is it set up to give you the classes that you need? Will you simply repeat the same courses, or is there a more customized path of study? And have you considered any "transfer" options? -
p.s
the school has no such programs offered to students who stay five years in ANY major. Because of today's view of getting out of college in 4 years as a must, the school does not offer benefits towards students who stay five years.
I guess the only benefit is a get "priority" but in reality, its just as hard to get classes that i would need to graduate when im a 5th year, as it is to get classes that i need to graduate when im a 4th year.
At the university i attend, there is a grocery list of classes necessary to complete my B.F.A. however, there are classes NOT on the list that i feel would be beneficial towards my becoming a well-rounded graphic artist. I've taken buisness classes, additional drawing classes, etc. to better prepare me for life after college.
I have thought of transferring to better, more intensefied colleges, however, better= more expensive, and unfortunately, i am not able to afford those costs. However, i am planning on taking graduate and even possibly masters studies in graphic design. -
I went through four years of design school at prestigeous university and feel I wasted the better part of my college years. Frankly, I wish I had taken three years of liberal arts classes - writing, reading, history, and the like. And then one year of design. I believe with that single year I could have learned enough to know what continuing education or grad school classes I should then take. The big problem with three, four, or five years of design school is only learning design. Don't you think that's kind of limited?
-
Your article provokes the question:
Are the competencies you're naming as being "needed BEFORE graduation" better obtained in the 'real world?
I feel that all 4-year schools need to require internships as opposed to a foundation year. Comparatively speaking, a year of interning is much more valuable to the student than a foundation of fine art. This is something that many 2-year schools have required of their students for years and is the primary reason why students who graduate from 4-year schools can't find jobs.
Students who graduate from 2-year programs that focus more on what employers want from a recent graduate find they are more easily hired than students who have spent too much time learning fine arts, history and theory without applying their knowledge to the 'real world'. The 'real world' is the best place to achieve understanding of the industry, business acumen, a firm grasp of the technology, maturity and a strong understanding of pre-press and the tools needed to perform the job. Most 2-year schools actually focus on these sets of skills in addition to teaching students what 'good' concept, design and typography are as a part of their curriculum. I know it must sound like a lot to accomplish in two years, and I will admit, most students don't complete dense programs like this in two years. However, it's important to understand that generally students who enter a 2-year program are already socially and professionally mature, they don't enroll right out of high school and have been raising families and working for several years... graphic design is a career change for them and they take it very seriously.
It is no big secret to students that most professors that teach at 4-year schools haven't a clue as to what the 'real world' is or haven't worked long enough in the industry to be able to explain to students how the theory and history they are learning could be applied. I might also mention that most of the people who teach in 2-year programs are currently working in the industry. It's easy to imagine that these individuals are going to focus more on communicating the knowledge that they feel would get a student hired at their place of employment. It's exactly the laundry list of items that appears on the AIGA website outlining what a student should know about graphic design.
Regardless of whether or not it's a 2-year, 4-year or even the 5-year school you where referring to, until these schools learn how to better use a student's time and money to prepare them for the industry, they will always be left feeling as though they, "just need to add one more year". -
"Regardless of whether or not it's a 2-year, 4-year or even the 5-year school you where referring to, until these schools learn how to better use a student's time and money to prepare them for the industry, they will always be left feeling as though they, "just need to add one more year""
This is a good point. Whatever time is given over to education it is meaningless unless the faculty and administration knows how to use that time efficiently.
I will, however, take issue with two things in the rest of your post: The word "most" is a dangerous generalization. I know many fine teachers who have dedicated themselves to teaching rather than practice. I also know of some two year programs that provide relevant information but little necessary inspiration.
That said you ask:
"Are the competencies you're naming as being "needed BEFORE graduation" better obtained in the 'real world?"
The real world - or a real job - is always the key experience, but you've got to get to the point where you are ready to take advantage of the opportunity. Whether that happens in the second, third, or fourth year of school is debatable, but one must be prepared even for that first internship. Moreover, one real world job may not be enough, which is why I support at least a year devoted to mandatory internships and apprenticeships, which some schools already provide as part of their three years.
The preceeding post about wasting time in a four year program is also valid. Why should we study design for such a long time when other areas of knowledge deserve our attention. I guess this comes down to the school of life theory. Master your competency and then branch out through additional classes and experiences. That's probably how most people learn anyway.
Nonetheless I stand by my original argument. If design is the competency you want to master, three years is simply not enough. -
The thing is, that more education can not be a bad thing. That design students and schools would go for it is the bigger issue and given the volatility, nebulousness and easy (re)interpretation of our profession it is next to impossible to make a strong argument for the need of that extra year.
And, like has been said already, it's all about what each student takes from the 2, 3 or 4 years they were at school. I went to a four year program in Mexico City. The four years were all about design with some business, legal and ethics classes thrown into the mix. The program was – as the kids say – tight . Looking back, I am impressed by how comprehensive that program was, I did everything: packaging, editorial, identity, industrial, signage, etc. I think I only had four classes devoted to learning software. I also had classes on doing mechanicals – this was 1998! We had big-picture, problem solving classes, art history, legal and business affairs, ethics? man, it was a great program! Unfortunately my classmates were a joke, I was with the same group of people (dropouts notwithstanding) for four years! And only 3-5 took it seriously. So, a good education is more than the amount of time you spend in college, it depends on teachers, students, weather, alignment of the stars and other metaphysical circumstances harder to control – but a stronger basis, as Steve suggests, couldn't hurt. -
The best educational program in the world will not motivate unmotivated students. Armin makes a good point. Fellow students are part of the chemistry. If you're stuck with the same slackers for 2, 3, 4, or 5 years, your quality time will suffer. I also believe the teachers will loose interest. Education is the sum of a lot of things, especially interactivity. The drags in my college didn't destroy the experience for me, but they didn't make it any better. Maybe that 4th or 5th year that Heller proposes, should be an "honors" year. I know it sounds weird to say "you're being honored with an extra year of school that you'll have to pay for," but this country was built on innovative ideas.
-
"It is no big secret to students that most professors that teach at 4-year schools haven't a clue as to what the 'real world' is or haven't worked long enough in the industry to be able to explain to students how the theory and history they are learning could be applied."
Kristy made many good points all of which i would agree with, except the above point. Many if not all of my teachers have been in the industry for many years and at least 3 of them have their own successful graphic design businesses.
Although they are not teaching in a prestigious program or anything like that, they treat their jobs seriously and with great professionalisim.
I do however agree completely with the mandatory internships, and it is something that i have been pushing for at my university for some time.
I also agree with the fact that the quality of students can either negatively or positively affect the quality of education given by the professors. If a professor sees a class of uninterested students, then he/she will not want to dedicate as much time as need be.
All very good points, and a very good article by Mr. Heller -
As a design educator who's been working for a decade to drag the graphic design program at a land-grant institution in the right direction, I am amused by some of the ideas in this discussion.
First, I thought a five year program was what Tom Ockerse, the man who invented the AIGA's standard outline for a baccalaureate design degree, was trying to implement at RISD years ago with his BGD idea.
The suggestion that a Bauhaus-style foundation year may not be the only approach is well taken. The hfg Ulm certainly emphasized literacy, method, and analysis over craft, and this alternative is widely practiced today.
While I agree with Mr. Heller that type literacy is important and hard to instill, I have to also wonder whether we aren't rapidly moving into a post-literate world. The altering attention spans of my students, as well as their ability to split focus, suggests that the 21st century's rapid fire media wash is creating a new consciousness, one based more on motion than stasis.
In a department poised on the brink of NASAD accreditation, the harshest criticism I've faced from fine arts colleagues is that I'm "balkanizing" my students by insisting on a separate, highly specialized curriculum. I realize that this is a non sequitur in many places where art and design have been separate entities for years. But this raises other questions, like whether preprofessional training for placement in industry should be the only model.
In my mind, the most appalling scenario, the one proposed by Helfand and Drenttel in Vancouver, is that our students will become, not only balkanized, but onanistic trivializers in a world desperately in need of unselfcentered intelligence. While I believe in the pertinence of contemporary design issues, in my syllabus these necessarily include altruism, philanthropy, and design for the non-profit sector.
Would a 5-year program prove beneficial? Probably, so long as it did not become merely a new standard preparatory course for the prevailing corporate model. -
"Would a 5-year program prove beneficial? Probably, so long as it did not become merely a new standard preparatory course for the prevailing corporate model."
100 percent in agreement. Design education should not be a farm for lemmings. But I don't believe that's going to happen. And I don't really see Balkanization as a serious issue. The fact is any specialized course of study will be, well, specialized.
I suggest using the idea of having a fifth year to integrate more humanities and liberal arts into the studio classes throughout the BFA period. That's called integration. Make these disciplines so integral to the making of design that the next generations of students will not even need to question their relevance. Or if they do question it, prove by example that knowledge of history, criticism, ethics, etc. are equal parts of the entire experience. -
I would like to say that everyone's opinion on this topic is quite interesting.
I would like to reference my teacher and mentor Fred Troller from Alfred University. Mr Heller wrote a article on Fred in the ny times about 2 years ago.
I've been in the so called real world for about 5 years now. I'm trying to remember my first years of study at Alfred. We had a one year core program like a lot of schools. It was set up to give you a sense of all liberal arts and their history. I remember it being a waste of time. However, at the time I was not ready or willing to devote myself to the design world. I recall it taking me about 2 years which is different for all individuals to figure out what they were passionate about.
Now I see lists of programs and skills you must have to get a job in the design world.
The biggiest mistake I see today is that students want to have a style. They want to use the newiest font and know the latest program. I don't feel that an extra year is totally necessary. I feel these programs like the one Fred established is to teach the students on how to think. How to conceptualize and to study the masters like Paul Rand and Vignelli. The emphasize is so much on photoshop techniques which I admit is important in todays world but first learn how to think then learn the programs on your own time.
Their is so much that schools will not teach you. How to market yourself, how to create a portfolio that is going to get you your dream job. I strongly believe that real world experiences and internships is a necessity but that is up to the individual not the school. You have got to have the drive to really make it. I had one of the greatiest design directors infront of me 4 days a week and I feel like I didn't take advantage of it. School is their to lay some ground work and a 5th year might just let students slack off more and not force themselves into getting themselves out their in the realworld.
Thanks for your time.
regards -
The term academic generally refers to "studies that are liberal or classical rather than technical or vocational." It seems that the technical inefficiencies that you are finding with today's students might be best resolved in the field or through internships.
Colleges can't possibly spend all of their time teaching software and technical aspects of design, because by the time it has all been taught, it is all out of date. The job of a liberal arts college is to create a well-rounded foundation to build upon. To take away foundation couses like 2D design and color theory would be absurd. You would end up pixel-pusher with no legs to stand on.
I would never give up the strong foundaion that a liberal arts degree has give me in exchange for something that would be more of a vocational education. -
I read this article with eager anticipation of finding at the conclusion: “Fortunately, this program already exists at the University of Cincinnati.”
Alas, it was not there, but as a graduate of the University of Cincinnati I feel their program addresses a lot of the points raised by Mr. Heller.
UC’s undergraduate graphic design program is five years in length. After the first year of foundation study students alternate quarters of classroom education with “real world” experience in design firms across the country. Students are also required to enroll in liberal arts courses during each “school” quarter.
I feel this program has produced well-rounded students with a solid basis in design theory who will not be shocked by the realities of working in the field. -
I'm currently a GD undergrad at CSUF. Many of the suggested ideas for a strong course load addressed above ie. emphasis on typography, internship, new & old technology, conceptualization etc., as well as foundational learning are already a part of CSUF's 4-year program. The GD program covers considerably more major course requirements than many of the other majors offered. I think the program was probably developed out of some of the same concerns that this article addressed. The design program is quite intense for a 4-year program but I think it's still pretty good quality. An individual could most likely find a solution to the problem discussed in this article by better selecting a school that provides quality pedagogy. If the Art Director is not in touch with "the real world" than he/she cannot provide a program that prepares you for it? The issue that should be addressed in this article is the steadily increasing school tuition and the continuous school budget cuts which limit course availability and instructor staffing. Adding a 5th year to the design program will be an unjustice to the students cost of earning a BFA. Budget cuts already leave students on semester-long waiting lists to get into courses needed to graduate. In many cases, this forces students into a 5th year of study anyways. Adding another year to the 4-year program in this case may just mean 6 years to graduation. Many students won't be able to afford a degree. Unfortunately, it's all about the money!
-
Money may not be the root of all evil but it is certainly is a major stumbling block in obtaining a good education, for some. As Kathy McCoy and V. Addison Wilson have indicated tuitions are high enough and rising so a five year program is prohibitive but not impossible.
It is incumbent upon educational institutions to return something on the large investment made by students (and their parents). Perhaps the fifth year is an honors year that is partially subsidized. Given that not all preferred courses are available to all students , this honors year could guarantee preferential acceptance into the exceptional classes .
Some schools provide the necessary pedagogy in four or three years. Others fail. The point of this article is to say that reforms should be considered, and unconventional thinking about how long and what constitutes a viable education is required. -
I can only speak from my own experience and it was good. I went to the Columbus College of Art and Design long, long ago. In order for the school to satisfy state requirements and be allowed to award a bonefide BFA, we had to take a minimum number of credits in science, phys ed, foreign language, et. al. Dean Canzani was so outraged that we had to "waste" this time on subjects other than art and design, he required we attend for 4 and a half years--the extra half covered the time we wasted on non-art courses. He also demanded we take a foundation year, and this was because we didn't know enough about art to choose a specialty--he was a very wise man. At the time, I thought he was a nut. Now I am grateful for his patriarchal guidance.
For example, though I had no intention of becoming a sculptor, I had to take 3-dimensional design for a semester in my foundation year and struggled to understand the otherworldly language of my real-world sculptor-teacher, Todd Slaughter. It was not wasted time because it taught me design principles that would later come into play to help me understand other aspects of 2-dimensional design. There is something to be learned from every lesson, whether it is your choice or not, so it's best to make the most of it. Design programs cannot be compared by time frame but rather content and intensity. A person taking 4 years of design at the (party school) University of Texas, for instance, will hardly compare to a graduate of Parsons or the Rhode Island School of Design, no matter what the scope of their talent. There is no comparison between the quality of education, the teaching staff or the work load where most of the learning occurs. The problem lies not with the duration of a program, but that so many schools of all kinds grant degrees and titles to anyone with the money to pay tuition, even if they only spend their time downloading music in the computer lab. As designers, we shape our reality's and industry's parameters by putting up with the frauds and failures of our field who continue to occupy jobs and bear titles they have no business holding.
Life is short. If you want to be the best, make the necessary sacrifices to get the best education. Make a wise choice on where to spend those 4 years, do the work, get the financial aid; let nothing stand between you and your goal. Time is the only thing you can spend once. There are no refunds. Excuses only serve to cheat you of your potential. -
I totally agree with Steve's views, lke most of the people who have commented, I can only speak from my own experiences. I obtained my Graphic Design degree from a four year university in Maryland which will remain nameless. Now in my fifth year in the field, I do not believe that school gave me a strong enough foundation for the work world. I believe that a fifth year is school for Graphics is not only a great idea but crucial. I learned almost all I needed to know working at my job. I laugh and feel sorry for the people I worked with in my internship in Baltimore because they were my free education. Was it really necessary that I completed five art history courses? I would have been much better off in an advanced Typography class or Layout. I feel that a well established University such as the one I attended should take a long hard look at possibly starting a five year Graphics program. The students would greatly benefit. I am now teaching Graphics at the High School level in North Carolina and feel that they are getting the same quality of education that I had to pay for, for free. They are truly going to be ahead of the game in college.
-
I am currently an undergrad design student at Old Dominion University in Virginia and this article hits home. Even though I have "2" more years before I "graduate", I have to agree that I don't think I'll be able to contend with the "big boys" from other specific design schools. I fear that my "piece of lambskin" will be just that, a piece of lambskin. I wish some schools would actually help their students become better prepared for REAL problems that they'll face. I really do think that 5 years would do most students wonders. I would give us time to develope the methods of thinking and actually understand the corporate side of things. If anyone can offer some GOOD advice, please share with a hopeful but scared graphic design student.
-
Derek: Work out arrangements with your school for you to receive credit for internships. Moreover, the lambskin is only the first step; the real learning begins in the workplace. Also continuing ed classes can be extremely helpful. Milton Glaser's Summer master class, for instance, is worth the time, effort, and challenge. But I'm sure there are others. It may require enrolling in another city - New York, L.A., Boston, etc. - but there are many ways to build on your foundation.
-
There are so many GD programs out there. You have to be suspicious of them. Many of them seem to be very questionable, luring students into expensive, interminable (already usually 5 or more years from my experience) confrontations with limited levels of design thinking and practice, possibly retarding students more than anything.
These programs are easy to create (seemingly, by the sheer number of them), because there are very few standards for what is to be taught, and if you can't teach pre-press or software or design theory, then there is no lack of pseudo-socratic teachers who are happy to educate by leaving the explorations up to the students (in which case, it is better for the student not to waste money on tuition). It's a popular major, and probably a good business for colleges to get into, because there are tons of mediocre artists out there who want to learn to make a buck with what skills they have developed by drawing cartoons in the corners of their high school textbooks.
And, as everyone always eventually admits, the education doesn't matter because you really start learning on the job. So teachers always have an excuse for why their students are so unprepared. It couldn't be their fault. What a crazy logic.
With this dynamic, teachers are also easily able to convince the students that they don't know much because they haven't worked yet, and scare them into spending more money to take more semesters doing preparatory work--enough preparatory work to sufficiently convince a potential employer that they are willing to kiss the feet of authority even at their own expense.
Even so, they still will not begin learning until they work, and only at that point, if they can think of anything other than making money to pay back their school loans, will they begin to understand how design relates to itself and the world.
It is amazing what a paralyzing and limiting effect too much of this "education" can have on a young person. And a worker pool full of such stunted minds will not be good for the profession. It is already happening that companies prefer to have their websites designed by non-designers, because the best of us often have vision so stunted that we can't get past art back to the common-sense sense of context or utility that was programmatically sucked from our consciousnesses in the name of the theoretically "Good" educational vacuum.
I would suggest, as one great designer once did, that if you want to be a graphic designer, major in anything BUT graphic design. Or don't go to college and start designing. Or go into a graphic design program knowing that every graphic design program is very imperfect; you'll learn most by challenging authority in the most intelligent way that you can. At first what you do won't be so intelligent, but since they are going to treat you indefinitely as a design child with no experience, why not act like a child and take advantage of the natural styles of learning as one, through curiosity, questioning, rebellion, wandering off, disobeying. One would think that this (done in a fairly mature way) would be encouraged, but it isn't, because that would lead to real advancements in knowledge and put certain people out of jobs. So know that it will be hard and keep doing it anyway. Be a savage. -
I'm not sure being a savage will help or hinder but I agree that alternative thinking is necessary to break the cycle of conformity and stagnation.
So here's another proposal for an experimental education approach cobbled together from some existing programs (not the least of which was the Bauhaus).
How about a school that is a design firm? Start with a year of basic training, then put the students to work. Have them spend the next three years advancing from novice, to apprentice, to assistant, to junior, to senior designer. And along the way, they do real work for profits, non-profits, the marketplace in general, etc. Maybe something valuable will arise. This can be supplemented by a slew of "electives."
Schools like BYU, SVA, Cooper, etc., have classes that act as real design entites, but maybe a full course-load based on this principal would be an interesting experiment not just for grads but undergrads.
Okay, that doesn't solve the problem of learning things other than design. But maybe this is a problem that will have to find its own solution through individual decisions and not institutional ones. -
i've known very succesful (and accomplished) desingers with the standard 3 years plus foundation. i've also known designers with higher education always in search for jobs with a poor portfolio. i've also known extraordinary designers with little formal education. and of course there are many who are highly educated and highly successful, as well as those who with the standard 3 + have the standard, average careers.
i dont deny that education is important. i've personally have benefitted from great instructors, and learned discipline in the foundation year, which for me was invaluable. but in the end, i believe motivation, dedication, curiosity, hard work... stuff like that makes the designer.
i would only add that instructors encourage students to read more, write more, and speak more, to incorporate it into the cirriculum. it's not only the responsibility of the liberal arts professor. design educators have an opportunity to help shape a more complete designer. -
I think that a wonderful suppliment to lacking educational back ground or poor educational programs in general is mentorship and internship. The one on one growth that comes in these situations is more valuable than many design courses, no matter if they are productive in comparison to other classes in academia or not. No one who has just spent their four years instead of two at a university (rather than a trade school) is going to want to stay annother becuase their first year wasn't sufficient. Constant involvement from teachers in the community to help network students into jobs and mentoring relationships would be a really strong resource. Plus I think the sooner a person going into this field gets hands on experience (versus theory) the better. Both are needed -these are just my thoughts as I am graduating only this year with a BFA.
-
Mr. Gleason, and so many of you seem to really know what is going on in some of these Universities. Many of your views seem to be exaclty what I appear to be witnessing at the university I am attending. It is a state school. I am not speaking from any kind of designer's perspective that's for sure. I have not even begun to take my upper level courses. I will tell you what I see from a man who has done the immpossible to be at this school taking what ever it is I am taking. When I think of all that I have been through to try to keep some hope for sincere happiness, like most of us, it's sic. Sometimes it can get so rough the luxury of art disappears. This is not about me! It's just for so long I have known that happiness and creation cannot happen alone. You need intervention and colaboration, no matter the suitation. For so long I have longed to be around inspiring minds. Fortuantly, today I met an instructor that inspires. It just reminds me how sad many of my previous instructors were. Not as people, but in the fact that they really didn't want to be at the university instructing. They want to be the artist they have always dreamt of. When I think of their attitude it amazes me that I am paying $600-1000 a class(not to mention military service and all that that implies). Some time I wonder if this is what happens to all those unmotived graduates! If you don't want the job don't work there. It is not fair to the students. I will also have to say that, after living in Europe four several years and coming back to the United States, when I see the generic quality of some of their ideas, it cocerns me from a social perspective. Not to say I have not seen great work at my school. Many gratuates get sucessful jobs, but one thing I have learned is that todays designers must develop a personality to become sucessful, or even survive. If an individual as a student or a professional, continues to think and design in the generic sense, they truly leave themselves vulnerable to outsourcing. Alot of design elements are about learning the tricks or formulas, like in music. Universities need to hire facualiy that want to be there. Expiereinced minds that stir life and direction to the students. If you can't find s decent staff, don't hold the program at all. Getting a degree is an individual desicion, many people go to college for many reasons. I have many that have nothing to do with my major, but if instuitions cannot offer quality instruction they shouldn't sell it. Some of you people make me wonder if I am wasting my time and money, but the inspiring artist/designer in me says to turn trash into treasure. It a great thing, everybody should try it!!
-
I definitely agree that teachers should be people who want more than anything to teach.
If they aren't, it's unfair to students, yes. But it's also unfair to themselves and to those people out there who truly feel that their place is in teaching. -
5 year curriculum would be great. But, no matter how much schooling one has to aquire to be considered skilled and possess confidence in their skills there will always be a void. There must be a point in a persons educational experience where they cannot rely on the school to educate them. You must get off your ass, do research, and learn on your own. School is just a starting point.
I never can understand how students can say "we need the school to prepare us for real world situations." Why dosen't the student take some initiative and make those situations happen.
It is like sports, you can only practice and learn so much. There comes a point in time where you have to just get out there and play the game. -
While I agree with Steve that a 5 year program would produce more well-rounded designers hopefully with some business acumen and literate ability, the problem is that there will still be more graphic designers than the world needs! What happens to the surplus of peoplke with just average design skills and the desire to be in the profession? Design firms always have trouble finding good new business development people because there is no school that teaches this. Advertising account executives are not always the best fit and an MBA from Harvard doesn't guarantee immediate success. When one of my graduate marketing students at Pratt said that she was taking the class because it was required but that by the end of the term she wanted to be on the marketing side of the design business, it was my finest teaching experience! Who says that marketing (selling) isn't creative? Who says that all graphic design projects are richly satisfying?
The design business has to become more inclusive and intelligent by offering a greater range of opportunities to eager art school graduates. Talent is not always shown in a portfolio. -
A five year school is a good idea to model from. There are too many problems that need to be addressed first.
1) The cost of one year in college is enormous. I am finishing up my college experience and I pay $32,000 a year. Thats not includeing expenses from books, supplies, and standard "having a life" everyday things.
2) I will argue that the foundation year is extremly important. I am a huge advocate of this. I am from a small school. My graduating class from high school was 27 people. Thats average for the public school of 400 students k-12.
I was not able to get a great foundation in highschool. I came into college in the graphic design major believing that photoshop was one of the only programs used and never heard of illustrator!
i have several friends who, in thier senior year of high school, switch from tech and science type interests to speading that last year building an art portfolio. That college freshman foundation class helped us out in so many ways.
I cant afford 5 years. I cant afford 4. So devise a way that helps us pay for college and I'm sure we will stay that extra year. -
I think what you are aiming at is not more classroom time, but individualized one-on-one time with a seasoned professional. We need an apprentice approach to teaching graphics vs a classroom.
Graphic Design should be taught hands On approach vs classroom.
That is my opinion only -
Actually a school that only teaches one on one is a wonderful idea. Think of the possibilities. A real master/apprentice situation. Now that would be an honors class.
-
i feel that design schools are just the starting point, the student should have the urge n the openness to learn. what is more important in a design school is the right kind of feed back to provide right direction to the students, as most of the times they are confused and cant make the necessary connections....
the market senario is gradually changing and most institutes dont provide the students with the real picture so when they get out in the market they dont have full confidence. i feel the number of years do matter but even in a 3-4 year course if the structure is planned well its good enough to give a platform for the students, and then it depents on the student to take it further from that. -
i feel that design schools are just the starting point, the student should have the urge n the openness to learn. what is more important in a design school is the right kind of feed back to provide right direction to the students, as most of the times they are confused and cant make the necessary connections....
the market senario is gradually changing and most institutes dont provide the students with the real picture so when they get out in the market they dont have full confidence. i feel the number of years do matter but even in a 3-4 year course if the structure is planned well its good enough to give a platform for the students, and then it depents on the student to take it further from that. -
These are all very hot topics for us here in Orlando. And from the looks of it, nationally as well. (37 replies! wow!)
We would love to have you come and speak during our AIGA 'Spot' event this April. 'Spot' is our yearly event that showcases student work completed during our mentorship program, a portfolio review, a guest speaker with a design education related topic and a juried display of themed work (professional and student).
Oh please, please, please. ;-) -
Can you please send me the email /url of the Institute at Bangalore,India where yu are given 5year training in graphic/Multimedia designs
Thanks
U.Anirudh -
I graduated from Portfolio Center in Atlanta with a great book, but no work experience. I got a job at Appelbaum and Associates right out of school and I was not prepared. I wish that there was a international apprentice program of sorts. After moving to New York and going through this painful learning process, I realize that it could have all been remedied with a good internship or 2.
Thanks for your article. -
i know this will add some controversy to this discussion, but I believe we are missing a critical link in the "5 yr" program. What no one has mentioned in my quick glance over the comments is any mention of establishing a fundamentals year at the high school level. I teach graphic design at the high school level where students have the opportunity to take four years of design education. They learn Illustrator, Photoshop, and InDesign. They learn to design posters, logos, CD covers and all of the typical things one might expect from a high school program. What has also been added are massive units on typography and the history or design. My students have been very successful in being accepted to design colleges in California and they leave my program ready to think about design. They no longer need to figure out how to use the computer, instead they worry about concepts, font choices, and color. I was just a panel speaker at the AIGA Chicago FutureHistory Design Education Conference and my student's work was well accepted by the attendees.
I think we as a profession are missing a vital resource when we ignore the education of high school students. I would like to see AIGA develop a set of standards for high school design education and an accreditation process. I believe that many state education departments are developing sets of standards based on outdates (1970s or early 80s) models and are really developing printing programs.
This would be a chance for students to make an educated decision about the career they are choosing and it would give higher educational institutions better raw materials to work with. -
WOOOOOOOOOOW. What a contradiction.
I hope we are not talking about getting rid of a foundations program. I agree that it is the problem, but merely because it is not taught well enough. Foundations is meant to be an introduction to the principles and elements of design. Something that introductory graphics classes should drill in and expand upon. If you think that alot of seniors are graphic majors are novices on type, you dont even want to know how bad they are on the language of graphics.
Then you have the problem of conceptualizing, " the big idea," and that is a problem. Doesnt that come after the basics? Learning the language and understanding the tools.
Graphic designers live by the use of the principles and elements of design.
If learning type is a long and tedious process, then what about learning to understand how to use the language?
It is such a contradiction to say that foundations is a waste of time because it does not give design instructors enough time to teach design.
I really must be missing something here.
NO, i think the biggest problem is the nature of design programs themselves rather than time allocated. -
O.K. The last 20 years saw many changes in the field of design communication. What is necessary to prepare for the next 20 years? My son has been accepted by Parsons, Pratt, and SVA. It appears that SVA will save him about 40,000. over the course of 4 years. Will attending one of the other schools validate the additional fees? SVA appears to be more technology and practical in application and Parsons more theoretical. SVA wins the awards. He is very hard working, takes creative risks and is an independent thinker. He is leaning towards Parsons as he believes there is more collaboration and opportunity to work with the other departments. He is very interested in the analitical aspects of design and is interested in Parsons IDC program. Any insight would be greatly appreciated. You may e-mail direct or better yet my son
-
5 years? 5 years experience in an agency will teach you 10-fold what you're being taught in school. Just go get a job. I went and got a job and taught myself. I've Worked for Disney Studios, Agencies in New York, published in Details, Esquire, Men's Life, FHM, I go to the store, see packaging I've designed, the list goes on. After 5 years of education, you're still newbies who have to be 'schooled'. Experience is everything.
-
hey sorry i ddint read whatever you guys have posted but i just wanted to tell you all that atleast you must have done graphics and designing but i cant findany institute or college which offers it here in india. please if any of you guys come across any institute or college which offers the course then please tell me about it. my email address is ironarun@yahoo.com thnxs guys.
-
I'm currently a senior graphic communications student at The University of Houston. We have an intense program here, where freshman begin with the fundamentals of design working merely with basic shapes in black and white for a whole semester. They learn the absolute basics of design: gestalt, foreground-background relationships, equivocal space, etc. Then they move forward to the intermediate level where they are introduced to media studies: OUTSIDE of technology. Generally, the first project consists of a black and white study of type - one of the first times type is introduced in the UH design program. (They are slightly introduced to type their first semester.) They pick a word related to the assignment and they spend weeks tracing the letters and arranging them in a composition to communicate the meaning and/or connotations of the word. Also at this level, they begin to study color and media: spray paint, line drawings, charcoal, etc. All things outside of technology.
We have a "Block program" here, where intermediate level students must present a portfolio in order to be allowed into the upperlevel courses. Upon acceptance, they are introduced into an intense 2 years of design study. Junior block starts with the basics of typography: the history of type, type terms, heirarchy, rags, kerning, leading, tracking, you name it. We are also taught the history of design from the development of the alphabet to heiroglyphics to postmodern. And there's also a course on technology: the learning of Illustrator, Photoshop, and InDesign. This is probably the first time technology is introduced to UH students. Collaboration projects are introduced junior year, as with the importance of reading and research. Concept is an important factor and is constantly drilled in our minds. Everything must have a purpose. We slightly touch on writing. Senior year touches base on the transition from student to professional, while still continually stressing the importance of good typography, research, concept, writing, etc. The students are also responsible for putting together a senior exhibition at the end of the year. (Fundraising, venue scouting, creating an aesthetic for the show, writing to businesses and professionals, looking at paper samples, etc.)
Round that out with all art majors requiring 6 art history courses and the core curriculum required at the university. (With all that is required, often times design students at UH generally NEED 5 years to complete all required credits.)
What I'm trying to express here while quickly describing the program is that I feel incredibly fortunate to be a part of this design program. From reading about other design programs, talking to students from other desing schools (2 year programs, mostly), and seeing the quality of work from some schools, I feel like UH has one of the better programs that I've seen thus far. Our professors try to at least touch base on some of the important aspects of design. Oftentimes, it's up to the students to dive into these aspects further, since time is limited. And while nothing is perfect, I think UH's program strives to stress what lots of other programs don't. Design is underestimated and misunderstood, and I believe that the education we're getting is trying to break that. I know from my experiences that I indeed started the program with a narrow understanding of design. But going through the program has opened my mind to what design can do. I've attained a lot of information after being in this program for nearly 4 years now, but I know there's still a lot of things left to learn. As mentioned in a few of the comments I've read here, experience is important, and the consistent learning of type, research and concept.
I know it may sound like I'm bragging about UH (and I am a little bit, I have to admit), I just wanted to state that I understand what Mr. Heller is aiming to express here. A good design education is hard to find. Good programs are few and far between. With all the bad design that is out there, designers need to start with a good education background in order to change that.
I know that after graduation, I'll still have a lot to learn, but knowing what kind of foundation I will have, that I will be ok when I enter the working world. I can only hope that other students feel the same.
Thanks for the article. It's good to know that people are acknowledging that the quality of a design education needs work and time. -
I have over forty years experience in creating, color separating, flawless layout, repeatability and every kind of design, engraving and printing problem, every one of which has a workable solution. I worked with "Designers" fresh out of school who could not make a design without copying from a competitor's sample or an ad in a magazine (sometimes with small changes) could not put the design into repeat, did not have a clue about concept to point of sale or any of the several processes from different partners in the transfer from concept to product. Five years of design school will present mobilly upward linguists of a more expectant level, and they will get the jobs and stumble through on salary, dressing the dress, incapable of walking the knowledgeable walk until they are experienced in the trade. Yes, it is a trade, not a position.
-
Even more so in a 'poor' country, where our aim is to keep design education - even in a non-funded private art/design school - as affordable and accessible as possible, Katherine.
It is essential for us to build in an economic aspect to design education, and we have tried client projects, bestowments, earn-and-learn programs, alternative currencies - and a combination of these - to find the golden mean. Can't say we've reached there, though.
There seems to be no alternative to providing students with a short-term option (2 years, in our current plan) that gives them just the baseline platform to start earning a livelihood from creative practice.
Multiple entry and exit points seem to be a good idea, along with individualized programme design - Steve, it can drive faculty crazy! But I do confess it works well when it does.
Arvind -
You can't get rid of Foundation unless you are truly interested in creating total specialists that will find it difficult to do anything but design.
Foundation is the entry point into the creative arts. As part of a communal collegiate experience, it allows the students to share a similar experience and communicate on a fundamental level about ideas and creativity across all disciplines as they matriculate through the programs. It also allows them to clarify their creative strengths BEFORE they commit to a discipline.
Forcing students to take graphic design right from the start will ensure that their education is a one dimensional experience similar to that of a technical school. -
"Foundation is the entry point into the creative arts. As part of a communal collegiate experience, it allows the students to share a similar experience and communicate on a fundamental level about ideas and creativity across all disciplines as they matriculate through the programs. It also allows them to clarify their creative strengths BEFORE they commit to a discipline."
This along with the Balkanisation statements made earlier in this debate are important in realizing that students are not "just designers". Academia also has a way of staying with tradition. If you are at a school that has always had Design as part of a Art curriculum it is very difficult to effect change. Jobs are at stake. And, jobs = people, so great care is taken not to toss educators out like old software titles. This is part of the tenure system. Not only that but students sense of Design as ART and communication is jepordized when one removes the foundational Art courses.
SOme of my best students could not have gotten into a "design" school for lack of a high school portfolio. So, I believe that the problem does not completely lie with Academia BUT within the field itself. We talk about theory and type nuances etc. and the majority of students will work in jobs that do not honor these skills.
5 years does not solve the problem when business is unwilling to nurture new talent in the way of training. My experience with graduates trying acquiring jobs has everything to do with companies that want a student to walk out of college ready to use 8 different programs at the highest of proficeincy. Let's be realistic. Until a person is using those programs 8+ hours a day, every day solving real client problems they are not going to be as fast or as good as an experienced worker. Too many times advertsments for entry level design jobs look like the catalog for Adobe Software titles. This is especially true coming from traditional print houses. New media firms seems to look for specifics while general agencies in the small to medium market want hires that can "do it all."
Top this with a field in which the entry level salary has remained in stasis for the last 9 years, what is a grad to do? The expense for more college puts them under a financial burden few before have shouldered. The market is paying less and less for their skills-- and wants more software skills. I think we need to look at the 5th year as interning/apprenticing with companies/agencies. Business needs to start replenishing the well they draw from by nurturing individuals vs. expecting cookie cutter automatons that can run 8 programs and spew out client work at ridiculous speed for a salary that prevents them from paying of their loans.
BTW, I teach at a liberal art college we have 8 design courses and cover 6 programs. We have the largest core curriculum in the nation(no, really factually 60% of the students classes) and, on top of that, a foundation year in art. It is not necessarily the number of classes but how and what you teach in them--and how you grade. Our students have a computer in front of them within 5 weeks of their first design class. Every class is hands on, tech AND theory. While I teach/demonstrate a skill they can do the same thing along with me. We also provide a portfolio class that trains students how to get ready for the job. It doesn't just make a pretty book. Many schools have too many students for the computer labs that they have access too. They have antiquated lecture halls with little computer access. So before adding more, I recommend that there is an adjustment to what is covered in the courses and how it is taught -- and graded.
WIth regards to grading, too many teachers spend time grading on how and item looks. That is about 60% of the grade. The other half is checking the disc for proper file structure, properly packed discs, proper software used, etc. And, that takes longer. To me that is an obligation of the professor in this field. I spend 8 hours grading 20 students on a multipage project because Master-pages, style sheet, printers spreads, bleeds, color models etc, need to be checked.
In conclusion, every school needs to address different issues within their curriculum to improve the student they help mold. And, business needs to have a good long look at expectations and renumeration. Together they need to partner in an apprenticeship model that provides a segue from a successful design student to a a successful designer. That is a sound investment that would warrant a 5th year. -
I'm amazed at all the comments made in the last 3 years and HIGHLY confused!
Let me explain - I'm to become one of those 'displaced auto workers from Detroit' very shortly here. I'm no spring chicken, but not too far along not to consider going back to school full time - which is what I intend to do. Now is my opportunity to do what I've always wanted to do since high school, graphic arts, more specifically photography. However the job market, at least here in Detroit, seems to be commanding more 'tech' skills.
So my confusion, which is being further fueled by reading the 5 year design school suggestion and all the comments posted in response, is whether to take the plunge into a 4 year BFA or a 2 year community college degree? The 2 year degree doesn't get that deep into photography, and the 4 year doesn't get into the tech stuff that employers want!
What to do?! -
I also attended the University of Cincinnati's 5-year design program. The school the author is describing exists, but because it's a state school it will never get the attention it deserves. The author of this article obviously did not do their research, rather embarrassing for him.
-
I am in the University of Cincinnati's 5-year design program and was sorely disappointed to see that such a prestigious (indeed, world-renowned) program was either completely ignored or carelessly forgotten by the author. Hmmm?
-
I personally am grateful for my undergraduate foundation year. Throughout my college education I consistently witnessed the positive way my fine arts classes effected my design. My mind was stretched by the different type of problem solving fine arts requires. Foundation classes also offer an opportunity for undecided 18 year olds coming out of high school to find out what they are interested in before committing to a degree.
-
As a graphic design teacher I agree that students spend too much time learning computer programs and not enough on design and typography. One way of addressing this would be to create intensive modules either in January or over the summer where students quickly learned particular programs that they would use in the ensuing semester. But I also think the first year foundation is important. The history of art and design (not to mention english and math) are important for developing designers in terms of understanding design in their own culture.
I am personally waiting for all these design programs to morph into one big program. Then we can all go back to concentrating on creativity. -
Looking at it from a teachers point of view, I can see how 5 years to train graphic designers might seem appropriate. But from a student point of view, is a career in graphic design really worth the amount of time and money spent on the education.
-
I spoke with my father who was an english teacher for 28 years regarding this subject. He made the interesting point that he didn't really feel that he learned how to teach untill he had been doing so for 6 or 7 years. He obviously felt that his education was valuable but it wasnt untill he got out into the real world that he truly learned his craft of choice.
My point being that you can only learn so much ragardless of the institution you are attending and major you have chosen. At some point you need to "get out of the library" and "get your hands dirty." A year or even two extra might never compare to a year or even month working and experienceing things in the real world. -
In the corporate world, I wouldn't be surprised to hear the following - why do you need five years of education when you can become a designer by attending a 2-day InDesign class?
© 2008 AIGA | 164 Fifth Avenue New York NY 10010 | 212 807 1990
Comments