InfoArch: Point Of View

Why did you choose these articles?

I chose these articles because I wanted to challenge myself with a topic that I was not only completely uneducated about, but also something that would be interesting to work with. I really struggled with comprehending the articles and had to spend a long time reading and rereading everything both designers had to say. Because receiving a dynamic, well-rounded, and ideal education is important to me, I found it intriguing to learn about the standpoints of these two renowned experts. 

Do you agree or disagree with the main point of their essays? Why?

Salchow's article is broken down into two myths or main arguments. 

I agree with the main points of the first myth he discusses. I agree with what he says about a graduate's experience at a school being summed up by his or her portfolio and also with what he says about the school being responsible for providing the ideology that will inspire students to grow in their own directions. However, when he states that schools should focus on quality rather than variety, he uses an analogy with food that I do not find relevant or successful at supporting his argument. Again, I do agree with what he says about schools not spending 4 years on non-visual aspects of education, such as liberal arts studies, although a little fundamental knowledge is important. I also agree that there should be an ideal balance of academic breadth and visual scholarship. 

In the second myth he discusses I agree with his main point that “Good designers are not always good teachers but good teachers are always good designers.” I do think that his arguments can be controversial, but I happen to agree with most of them. 

In Paula Scher's article, she discusses how theoretics should not be applied to design education because it makes things too complicated and eventually boring. I don't agree with this completely because she is saying that since older professional designers don't use or need the knowledge of all this terminology and jargon that is being taught, it must not be necessary. I do think that it is good to learn theoretics, but it shouldn't be the primary focus of design education. She says that its not the "exclusionary language," but the way design teachers are making graphic design concepts even more complicated to explain. I think this is an ignorant thing to say, considering the complexity of the design principles makes them hard to clarify easily (It isn't the teacher's lack of ability to teach).

However, I do completely agree with what Scher says about how "Designers learn by doing." She makes a good point by saying that this is sped up when someone gives students a way to do something and by learning how to do it, they can understand it better. Once they understand it, they can teach somebody else.

What possibilities do you foresee for designing, comparing and contrasting the two?

Salchow discusses 2 myths about design education by stating how a school should be balanced in both its curriculum and within the makeup of its faculty, while Scher talks more specifically about how technical jargon is not necessary for teaching design principles and how design students learn best. 

I think that my website needs to start with information about the two authors, in biographical form. That way the viewer can learn about who these designers are and why they are qualified to say what they have to say. Then, I need to introduce the titles of each of their essays so that the viewer can choose which they want to learn about. I don't see any immediate correlations among the two essays, other than in that they both discuss design education. Therefore, my site needs to create a narrative that guides the viewer through one at a time. Maybe I will find a way to link one point from Salchow's article to a point in Scher's article, which would provide a whole new level of read to my website.

I also want the main arguments from each essay to stand out in hierarchy so that it remains a consistent element of the layout. This will allow the viewer to see what all the secondary text is saying in a more simplified version. 

I need to find a way to link the two together because as of right now, a direct contrast is all that seems reasonable.  One possible link within Salchow's essay could be "quality rather than variety" in his first myth and "quality over quantity" in his second myth. Maybe I could link that to Scher's message that "doing rather than telling" is more effective in design education. 

MY RESEARCH OUTLINES

GORDON SALCHOW'S ARTICLE

PAULA SHER'S ARTICLE