foundation education for graphic designers

Pitfalls in the Status of Comprehensive Foundations Design Education at SUNY New Paltz

Art as design, design as art, or design as differentiated from art. As the world of graphic design expands, the question arises as to whether the two are one and the same, or if a distinction between them can be made. Design is the process of “carefully creating this thing” (Elimeliah, 2006), a clearly thought-out, researched, and developed manifestation of an idea or concept in order to convey a message. The aesthetics of design are a visual communication carefully crafted by the designer based upon concepts. Frank Baseman (2005) explains that design is about “embracing conceptual thinking, idea generation and communication.” Art seems to be of a separate nature. Although it is visual, the messages conveyed are far from conceptual or communicatory, but really an expression of personal emotion, void of standard rules. Artists create from emotion; they are driven by their own feelings. The difference between the two disciplines must lie in what dictates or motivates designers versus artists. Commerce is the driving force behind design; therefore it is the differentiating factor. If this separation can be made between art and design, the question becomes: How is graphic design taught in post-secondary level in a valuable and conceptually supported way?
Post-secondary graphic design education in universities has become a huge draw for students interested in art, but who desire a path far from the highly esteemed yet small niche of fine arts. The career choice of graphic design takes dedication, passion, endurance, and basic talent. It also takes a strong education deeply rooted in creative problem-solving skills, organization, research, communication skills, and much more. Because of changing social, economic, and technical forces, there is a need for different design education approaches. As Meredith Davis (2005) stated in her essay on graphic design education, these new practices and needs for design are no longer supported by art-based education. Art-based design education began with the Bauhaus movement in Switzerland and has been an idea supported by the National Association of Schools of Art and Design (NASAD), an association in charge of accreditation for art and design programs. Davis states that fine arts-based criteria has prevented efforts to improve graphic design education because current design education bears little resemblance to the professional practice of design.
At SUNY New Paltz, the foundations program taken during students’ freshman year, and a requirement for all declared art majors, does not support graphic design problem-solving skills, nor does it teach design students in a useful manner. The next course available in the foundations program is Graphic Design, and this is a prerequisite for all other graphic design classes. After completing this course, design students enter the second semester of their sophomore year. This leaves students only two-and-a-half years to cram in all required courses as well as enough projects for a strong portfolio. It leaves little room for extra classes specific to individual interests or real professional experience. Students are not offered the option of taking critical interdisciplinary classes involving design, problem-solving skills, or any other useful foundations classes in the beginning of their graphic education. The foundations program is based on aesthetics and means nothing for design if not taught alongside design values. Students are not offered alternatives to Introduction to Design I and II or Drawing I and II. These programs are purely art-based and are not valuable for design student’s conceptual development, yet they are the only options currently available for all declared art majors. These classes are taught in an elementary manner, and the lack of challenge within the program does not eliminate students who lack passion, skill, or competition to succeed in graphic design. Although design students may graduate from this program, it does not necessarily give them an advantage post-college in the job market. No visual communications principles are taught. The projects are static and are not based upon real design issues or problems. Design students must be prepared for the fast-paced world of graphic design when they graduate. The foundations program teaches classes that produce individuals who can create beautiful work, but the survival of graphic design as a profession depends on designers who not only produce aesthetically pleasing pieces, but can understand principles, which are strategy in business, marketing and communications, as well as insight into political, economic, and social issues. Currently, design students at SUNY New Paltz cannot even begin to learn or create projects using design principles and visual communication skills until they have completed the art foundations courses.
So where does this leave design students when they leave the university to make their way into the world as graphic designers? It leaves them at a disadvantage in the sense that almost half of a graphic design major’s time is spent drawing figures and perspective, building mobiles, and learning about fine artists from years past. What about learning about contemporary design and designers? This is packed into a twice-weekly, one-hour class for a semester. What about learning how to research and develop concepts in order to design a real-life project? What about understanding the marketing process and how designers are involved? Aesthetics, drawing, and painting skills are taught in these foundations programs, but logical design concepts or societal sensitivity are not addressed or taught alongside these other skills. Marketing, psychology, sociology, and communication concepts may not be important for fine arts, metals, or ceramics majors, but they are critical in the development of concept-driven designers and should be essential in specific graphic design foundations classes.
The advantages to the current foundations program include the development of drawing skills, which is important to graphic design. Sketches and thumbnails are pertinent for brainstorming ideas and layouts, despite the increasing use of computers. Color theory is taught in Design I and is a great tool for designers; but color theory can be taught alongside psychology of color and the motivations for the use of color, which would be much more useful to a budding designer. Foundations courses do support sketchbooks, although the sketchbook assignments are static and usually do not comply with the project or concept being taught.
Disadvantages for design students in the current foundations program include the “dumbing down” of courses to allow for students who have little art experience or an inadequate high-school art education. Because concepts or design principles are not taught in conjunction with aesthetics, it does not encourage thinking, require research and documentation, primary and secondary sources, nor principles of creativity. It forces static projects and encourages students to rush into finished projects without actually thinking conceptually about them. As Kerry Polite says in her essay “Thinking About Design Education” (2004), these final projects then communicate nothing and appear derivative of past art works. The majority of these classes do not even utilize a computer, so students are not introduced to basic graphic design programs or computer skills. This leaves many design students at a disadvantage when they actually get to a design class because they experience so much time and frustration figuring out what tools to use and the basics of the Macintosh; their final products and learning suffer. Graphic design majors should have the availability of design-specific programs at the very outset of their college education in order to fully and appropriately develop their design skills.
Because design has evolved into a commercially-based discipline, a design education should be based upon commercial needs. Persuasion is integral to the field, requiring good designers to be effective persuaders, as suggested in “Cramming Conceptual Abilities into Design Education” by Dan Warner (2005). He states that persuasion is about understanding intellect, logic, and emotion alongside aesthetics. He asks what can be done to teach design students how to think “clearly, critically, as well as creatively.” Although he is not saying design programs should be liberal arts programs, he proposes the idea that design students should have broad exposure to history, literature, rhetoric, debate, social sciences, and communications. This information can then allow students to be more knowledgeable in general, thereby avoiding illogical thinking or gaps in education. Davis also touches upon the subjects she believes would develop better designers: linguistics, psychology, anthropology, and sociology. Baseman asks, “When did the notion of thinking and making as separate acts” come about?
In terms of where the program at SUNY New Paltz currently stands, it is exactly what Gunner Swanson (2005) says: “Design is preceded by core classes common to all other arts specialized to skills.” Only later are students introduced to history and theory. The foundations program at New Paltz must evolve to parallel the changing needs of design. Ken Garland (2005) calls for the redefinition of design as a conceptual practice involving a variety of problem-solving skills, language, and theory and for it to be taught at the outset of a designer’s education. New Paltz must find a way to create a separate program specifically targeted at entry-level graphic design majors. It must be a rigorous, well-rounded group of core classes that push clear, conceptual thought, and basic knowledge and theory. It should be taught with projects and papers pertaining to the skills being mastered. A targeted graphic design program would ultimately provide design students with much stronger portfolios for the competitive job market and better prepare them for the real world of graphic design.