Abstract:

How do design professors teach “design without designing” in a way that benefits the community and at the same time prepares designers of the future for long-term careers in an industry that will look drastically different than it looks currently?

In a course entitled 351 Communications Design Class - Problem Solving Strategies, those goals are the focus—showing the value of design through design thinking without designing. The course was established to test this researcher’s theories about developing the skillsets of the designer of the future in which designing is not the focus of the course, but is instead based on previous studies about theoretical skills at the undergraduate level (deprogramming, moving beyond the grade in IHE (institutions of higher education), fear of failure/unknown, entrepreneurial thinking, adaptability) and which don’t involve traditional design skill sets. This course has focused primarily on high-level thinking versus software skills—the why instead of the how—as well as the critical thinking skills. In this series of classes, less time is spent on aesthetic design and more on the conceptual and design thinking processes, while the actual design portion is roughly three weeks of the semester.

This study acts as more than just a case study using project-based learning and collaboration, but is documented in its successes with additional pedagogical innovations. Under the umbrella topic of “What Would I Change,” this course allows for innovation through an unknown project to allow students to determine the project means and outcomes through a highly researched and iterative process. These initiatives began with a previous collaboration project with the United Nations that tested and practiced this research through a pedagogical evolution process and was awarded with teaching citations. This course has been adapted into a more research-based, experimental experience (for first semester, Junior year students) which allows us to present hurdles to students in a variety of ways including “concrete ambiguity” as one of the pedagogical techniques in which traditional design classroom methods are challenged through topics and practices which change every semester. We motivated student designers to step forward as leaders versus passive respondents to traditional graphic design projects in order to address ideas such as racism, government responsibility, inclusivity, social policy, domestic violence, community engagement and sustainability with excellent results for both clients and students.

To date, we have conducted productive failure assignments (or intentional failures), experimented with the team dynamic and leadership roles and challenged students to “design without designing” and introduced high-level research methods using design thinking to benefit the community, charities and nonprofits.
By studying these classroom experiences through empirical observations and surveys we interpret the data through the principle of least effort and practice theory perspectives in order to determine that these types of 21st century expectations of institutions of higher education in design will help prepare future designers to find success in a career that is continually and rapidly evolving along with the technology that the industry employs.

Keywords:

Graphic design, design pedagogy, design thinking, failure, pedagogical innovation, higher education, problem based learning.