From Voice ~ Topics: education, journals

The Re-Skilling of the American Art Student

The idea of skill has come to seem woefully outdated in an art world that emphasizes conceptual innovation, and making the right statement at the right time, with the right media. Gone are the days when life drawing was the backbone of any artists’ skill set. The term “skill” carries not only an academic connotation, but a working-class one. The skilled worker is one who knows something about a particular process (which puts him or her a step above the unskilled worker), but is not part of the professional class. Plumbers, auto mechanics and short-order cooks are skilled workers.

I’m arguing for the re-skilling of the American art student across the disciplines of fine and applied art, but working from our own design field as a model. Liberal arts education is based on the view that a certain body of knowledge is required to create a well-rounded person and an informed citizen of the world. The liberal arts ethos withdraws the pursuit of knowledge from the practical concerns of daily life; indeed, it views practical pressures as somehow tainting the purity of our educational goals.

That philosophy, of course, is under attack, and schools like New York University are actually encouraging liberal arts students to pursue professional internships during college (a practice unheard of a decade ago), and even to take “non-credit” workshops on such practical subjects as “graphic design.” The pressure for liberal arts programs to change comes from the customers: the students and their parents. Meanwhile, arts education offers a physically engaged, skill-based alternative to the liberal arts.

Skills


Conceptual skills: how to get ideas
Let’s demystify the notion of “conceptual thinking.” At the bottom, conceptual thinking is about getting ideas for a project: how to solve a problem, how to generate content, how to set the parameters of a project. Some students are good at this and some students are terrible, but there’s a lot we as educators can do to help them learn how to get ideas. This is where our work must begin. Thinking is not a mystery; it’s a skill.

Technical skills: how to realize ideas

Many educators, even in design, put technical skill at the bottom of their list of priorities. It’s not very glamorous or interesting to teach how to use software or make a comp. But technical training belongs right near the top because without technique, students are limited to primitive ways of realizing their work. So many of the art forms that have helped define the 20th century require a high level of technical proficiency: film, photography, video, design, architecture, animation. And yet faculty often looks down upon the teaching of technique. Oddly enough, technical skills are what many of our students want. Teachers would often rather spend a five-hour critique talking about “ideas,” while their students are hungry for technical knowledge.

Critical skills: how to build the discourse

We help students place their work in a historical and social context. Why do the fields of art and design function the way they do? What issues are artists and designers currently confronting in their work, and what’s the tradition against which contemporary practice takes place? This critical understanding helps students engage the world in a relevant way. The highest level of success for a designer or artist is, in my view, to create work that influences others in the field (or better yet, people in other fields). Such work contributes to the discourse.

Social skills: how to work with people and make things happen

Social skills are harder to teach. There is no curriculum for showing students the importance of social interaction in the career of an artist or designer. You have to create situations where they can and must collaborate. I’m doing this in my graduate program at Maryland Institute College of Art by creating large-scale projects that rely on collaboration. Through these projects, the students witness the fact that big things are rarely done alone. It’s great preparation for the realities of the working world.

Professional skills: how to make a living

Last but not least: art schools need to prepare students for the working world. We need to show them how to document their work: record it, reproduce it, talk about it. Every student should leave school with a personal/professional website that they built themselves. They should all know how to write a resume, how to write a letter, how to write a proposal, and how to communicate effectively via email.

At the end of the day, a person who has successfully pursued these skills—conceptual, technical, critical, social and professional—is likely to be effective in many walks of life. The pursuit and cultivation of these skills may help students understand where their strengths and interests lie, and prepare them for a satisfying life in the working world.

Sacred Cows

In order to embrace a skill-based approach to art education, we have to question some of the sacred cows of the Art School.

Teaching art

The first one is “teaching art.” We don’t teach art; we teach art students. Art students are our customers. We have a serious obligation to them, and it is important to recognize their needs and desires in this new century, and not to be trapped in our views of what “art” is. A lot of teaching is focused more on the needs (and habits) of faculty than it is on the needs of our students.

The critique

The old atelier model was to paint or draw in front of a live model for five hours while the professor wandered around making comments. That model was replaced by an even worse one: the critique, a five-hour discussion group where students talk about each other’s work, often pursuing a level of detail that far exceeds the intensity of the piece at hand. Students hate critiques, but in the post-skills studio environment, there is simply nothing else to do. Let’s use some of the time wasted in critiques to build skills.

Art enrichment
Art enrichment is over. It was the notion propagated in the 1950s that everyone should learn to understand and appreciate art, thus making people more sensitive and cultivated. This model still drives many museum education programs, as well as arts education in the schools, which is why art is the first subject to get cut. Enrichment is, by definition, a luxury. Today, people’s educational pursuits are more likely to be driven by practical and professional goals than spiritual enlightenment or “self improvement.” At the K-12 level, schools should be striving not to unleash a universal love for form and color, but to expose students to the properties and resistances of tools and materials, showing them how to solve problems and communicate visually and structurally. At the college level, programs for graduates, undergraduates, and post-graduates should think of the practical goals that drive people today towards higher education.

Responsibility towards our students

It is acceptable to say that we are preparing undergraduate students for “life in general,” but through an action- and skill-based course of study. But I believe we must be preparing graduate students to pursue sustaining creative work in their field of study. Although many of our graduates will not become “professional artists” within the gallery system, they should all leave school with a variety of concrete skills, skills that would be useful to a person in any path of life.

We can’t teach people to be geniuses (although, fortunately, our students are very, very talented), but we can teach them skills. It’s up to them to put those skills to work.

About the Author: Ellen Lupton is a writer, curator, and graphic designer. She is director of the MFA program in graphic design at Maryland Institute College of Art (MICA) in Baltimore. She also is curator of contemporary design at Cooper-Hewitt National Design Museum in New York City.

  1. link to this comment by J. Coates Tue Mar 29, 2005

    I agree with many points Ellen makes. I think more technical skill is needed and would be provided but for a lack of funding, space, time, etc. however...

    Ellen says: "Oddly enough, technical skills are what many of our students want. Teachers would often rather spend a five-hour critique talking about “ideas,” while their students are hungry for technical knowledge." AND "the critique, a five-hour discussion group where students talk about each other’s work, often pursuing a level of detail that far exceeds the intensity of the piece at hand. Students hate critiques, but in the post-skills studio environment, there is simply nothing else to do. Let’s use some of the time wasted in critiques to build skills."

    I think it is more then reasonable for faculty to focus on ideas in the class room over the demands of students one to five years out of high school who barely understand what design is. Learning anything is a mix of things. Ideas, skills, etc. Even in later statements in this article Ellen essentially say as much. Five hours of talk for a basic poster design by a sophomore IS too much. But taking two hours to talk about 15-24 students design work in more detail is not unreasonable.

    (I would be reluctant to base technical classes or percentages of curriculum on student demand. In the mid 1990s Photoshop, Pagemill, and XPress were all the rage. Then it became Dreamweaver, Flash, and InDesign. In 3 years it will be two or three other programs. More important than learning a specific program skill is learning the IDEA and concepts of interactive web design and the IDEA and mechanisms of page layout software. It is a teach a man to fish problem. Teach fishing using nets, poles, with a fly, a worm, by hand, with cat gut and monofilament, with a stick of dynamite, etc. But most importantly, teach the Zen of fishing!)

    I have had as many students say they like the crit as those who say they hate it. When I have conducted class surveys, students who hate the crit often add that if it were peer to peer - or just the professor, it would be OK. In other words, everyone has a preference for the *kind* of crit their work is subjected to. My advice, keep the crit but vary what kind it is and watch the clock.

    Ellen says "We help students place their work in a historical and social context. Why do the fields of art and design function the way they do? What issues are artists and designers currently confronting in their work, and what’s the tradition against which contemporary practice takes place? This critical understanding helps students engage the world in a relevant way. The highest level of success for a designer or artist is, in my view, to create work that influences others in the field (or better yet, people in other fields). Such work contributes to the discourse."

    That paragraph seems to advocate discussion of history, society, practice, tradition, and critical understanding of design and its place in the world. I see all of that derivative of or part of the critical process in question. Discourse, critique, critical understanding seem to me to be part of the same structure known as a liberal arts education. Yes, teach technical but never loose site of or diminish the power of the IDEA! The mind is mightier than the mouse.

  2. link to this comment by don nelson Tue Mar 29, 2005

    The skilled musician is more than a step above the unskilled worker, and the skilled visual artist, like the musician, can only be effective with a mastery of a certain vocabulary. The unskilled artist or designer is doomed to failure because his/her work will not look confident or convincing and the synergies of juxtaposition will be missing from the work
    Maybe our tendency to "label" people with a word or two is simplistic...isn't it time to recognize the complexities inherent in creative work.

  3. link to this comment by Davey G. Johnson Tue Apr 05, 2005

    Here's something:
    Working in the real world, I don't know how many times I've received ads from recent graduates of art schools that are nicely designed, but absolute *distasters* to deal with when getting them to correctly spec out. That's not to say I never make mistakes (I've been known to forget to convert things from RGB to CMYK on a number of occasions), but I wonder about what goes on in graphic design classrooms. To wit, a class at the California College of the Arts by Kent Williams required students to illustrate stories by some fairly well-known authors. Those stories and illustrations would then be included in a magazine. They couldn't find any undergraduate students in the design program with the skills to lay out a magazine, and ended up bringing a friend of mine from the film/video department who'd worked as a designer for years. As a self-taught designer, I wonder about graphic design programs. It seems to me that one would be better off majoring in English and minoring in fine arts (or vice-versa), buying a few books and learning the software. Design is a serious discipline, but I feel as if students who major in design don't tend to get the breadth of education that truly *makes* a designer, and in many cases, they're not skilled enough at the end of four years to even be a proficient production artist.

  4. link to this comment by tuan Wed Apr 06, 2005

    - j.coattes -
    at your school do you separate out a technical digital tools class or are you like me having to mix in learning the apps with the conceptual/principles stuff during projects b/c you don't have the resources (both in faculty or class room space) to have that techniques class.
    i know private art school like mica, caa, & calarts, are structured to have access to industry professional adjuncts to come in and teach those skills.


    - Davey G. Johnson -
    it's very odd that a cca graphic design student couldn't lay out a magazine. i've seen there online galleries and they seem very competent with those 2-d spatial relationships. if it is a matter of production maybe those students didn't have their internships yet. or maybe the ones who knew indesign where too busy with their own "non-client-stifling" academic projects to bother with illustrators who don't like their illustrations "messed with" b/c those graphic design students know they'll have plenty of time after graduation to deal with that.

  5. link to this comment by Adam Garcia Thu Apr 07, 2005

    I am presently a Graphic Design student at the Minneapolis College of Art and Design. Fortunately I have had some experience in publication design and music-related work before attending school,and have discovered that the "Social skills" sometimes simply cannot be taught. All of the fortuitous opportunities I have gotten were first accomplished through that initial personal interaction... then came the work. And although I stand by my work 100 percent, I understand that am going to be immersed in a commercial world where said interactions are so necessary. However, I do agree that there needs to be an increased focus on cooperation among students in design-based fields, especially in schools where there are such a variety of media.

  6. link to this comment by Davey G. Johnson Thu Apr 07, 2005

    Tuan:
    They simply didn't have the production/dummying skills to be able to put together a full-color magazine. No question about it, I've seen some really nice 2D stuff come out of CCA, but they shouldn't have to rely on an internship to learn even the most basic of production skills. By the way, this was actually in the Quark 4 era, back before they took the "Craft" out of the name of the school (a dumb move, if you ask me). InDesign was but a mere curiosity, not the well-honed, but sometimes frustrating behemoth it is today.

    As for the question of illustrators not wanting to have their stuff messed with? I've worked with plenty of illustrators and few have ever complained. It's the photographers who bitch about how their work is cropped and/or color-corrected...

  7. link to this comment by AH Thu Apr 07, 2005

    Great discussion!

    While I was in school (4 year BS, Graphic Design major), some of my classmates had the opposite attitude about technical skills vs. hand skills. They felt they didn't need to know how to draw and do the traditional sketch concepting because all the final work is done on the computer. They would head straight to the computer to begin their designs. Not good, as often their ideas were limited to their software skill level.

    As for knowing how to do production work out of school... It's very important to know how to prepare a proper file for actual printing. I didn't know all I needed to when graduating and felt insecure and fearful of making mistakes in Quark (mostly). But what I had were great design concepts and fairly decent execution (mostly in Illustrator).

    You can teach production skills to almost anyone, but you cannot teach great ideas.

  8. link to this comment by Kevin Richardson Thu Apr 07, 2005

    I find that students have the ideas? but not the knowledge of what menu to look under, or what tool to use to help execute them. Through a gradual introduction to these tools through a progression of projects, along with skills in documenting their, research, brainstorming and problem solving? I am seeing, more confident young designers. These students are not only able to talk about the design choices they have made but, can also, through exposure to classmates work offer constructive criticism to them, AND themselves.

  9. link to this comment by Christopher Simmons Thu Apr 07, 2005

    Thanks for an excellent article, Ellen. I couldn't agree with you more.

    One of the comments below (I find the reverse chronological listing of the comments here to be infuriatingly counter-intuitive, by the way), references CCA's dropping of the term "Crafts" from their name. When I was a student at CCA(C) their motto, "Theory and Practice" was gospel. In professional practice — as in life — there is an intrinsic and vital relationship between one's ability to conceive a thing, and one's ability to articulate it. Certainly practice (the doing and making of things) is meaningless if it does not proceed from a sound conceptual platform. But conceptual thinking, absent the skill to effectively and materially communicate it, is an even more futile pursuit. The name change was (I believe) a marketing decision more than it was a reflection of a shift in philosophy. Nonetheless, it does suggest a marginalization of "Craft" and that is disheartening.

    In San Francisco, CCA is rivaled by The Academy of Art, an open enrollment, multi-disciplinary private art school. In broad strokes, CCA is seen as a conceptual program, whereas the Academy is generally regarded as a more skill-based program. I probably don't have to tell you that to many, skill is equated with a vocational or working class education, and carries with it the stigma of being somehow less noble, meaningful or important a course of study than a "theoretical" education.

    I have taught at both schools, and I honestly feel that both are excellent programs, though neither is without its flaws. Most recently, I have been teaching at the Academy, and have found that the emphasis of skill brings with it an auxiliary benefit: students who are taught skills are taught discipline. They are generally possessed of a strong work ethic and commitment to the process of learning.

    The goal of a skill-based education is mastery, and mastery brings with it an expectation of the highest achievable standards. Surely this should be the goal of any educational program.

  10. link to this comment by James King Thu Apr 07, 2005

    Its a shame that we have to have this discussion. Its also a shame that I only truly realised that design is a vocational profession relatively late in my education. Thankfully, there was enough time to scrape together a basic set of skills before graduating from my London-based BA (all of Ellen's points ring true on this side of the pond).

    I like Milton Glaser's opinion that a designer has to find their place in the spectrum between artist and businessman. At any point along the way between art and business the need for proficiency doesn't change, but the emphasis of this proficiency does shift along the spectrum from conceptual skills, through technical, critical, social and professional.

    The teacher responsible for pointing out the value of skills to me said it this way:

    "No one here is interested in your work unless you can talk about it. No one cares what you say about your work unless you do what you say."

    Harsh but true.

  11. link to this comment by steve Heller Fri Apr 08, 2005

    When I began many years ago, I had ideas but no skill. I learned from printers, typesetters, vendors (i.e. paper merchants, ink slingers, velox makers). I never learned the right way. I never felt totally comfortable with the skills I had, and that actually travelled over to the computer. I thought that with the Mac I could start from zero. But alas without the solid fundamentals, learning rote methods did not increase my proficencies.

    What we need (perhaps), and what, for example, my son's high school is currently doing, is teaching graphic techniques (i.e. all the key Mac programs) in the freshman and sophomore years (meanwhile challenging the conceptual side as well), by the junior year studio art and design are integrated. And if the student wants to continue in the senior there is a graphic design concentration, which will doubtless give the wannabe designer a leg-up in art school (if only foundation year was not so vague). In short, start this process much earlier than it has been done in traditional education or add a year to the educat ional calendar

  12. link to this comment by tuan Fri Apr 08, 2005

    i was learned to type (the two hands method, whatever that is called, not the single finger peck) in the 7th grade on ibm typewriters with the ball heads. this was all about skills. nothing about grammer or creative writing, just pure proficiency efficiency. nowadays, i could totally see middle school students being proficient in bezier handles wrangling and alpha channel quick masks. with all this reading about scrapbooking and introduction of blogs and imovie into college composition 101 writing courses, it seems that society is not only moving towards visual literacy, but visual making.

    there are the technical skills you need to visually articulate your concepts and have them print to your local epson color inkjet, then there are the production skills to prep a 4 color job with 2 spots, a diecut and a gloss varnish to go a 6 color hexachrome offset printer in canada. as an educator who has to instruct my students on how to acquire enough skills for 2-d laying out with illustrator photoshop indesign, and then help them with their 3-d motion compositions based on the technical skills of after-effects final cut pro protools, and then for the websites they want, some dynamic markup language skills with a sprinkle of css, and then to top it all off some technical know how of java based action scripting to properly realize their 4-d based experiential interactive project...

    dude, there isn't class time for productions skills.
    hello, summer internship.

    "oh, what's that dear student? is fontlab not generating your opentype face correctly? here let me take a look at the preferences..."

  13. link to this comment by tuan Fri Apr 08, 2005

    "i was learned to type..." > "i learned to type..."

    "what's that? along with the teaching a conceptual methodology strategies and conducting a theory critical critique and instucting techinical know how, i am supposed to check their grammer also...?!@#"

  14. link to this comment by Michael Pinto Sat Apr 09, 2005

    The critique is one of the most important techniques for teaching design students. The reason is that it forces students to verbalize why they picked a solution - this is highly valuable in the real world where they will have to interact with clients.

    Good solutions and taste don't always stand on their own - it's critical they we be able to explain the why to our clients. What's the point of creating great design if it never sees the light of day?

  15. link to this comment by Jim Gillgam Tue Apr 12, 2005

    The basics skills of rendering/drawing/sketching need to be emphasized much more! There are so many unemployed designers that have great ideas and no skills to express them. We have let these young people down by ignoring the technical skills that enable designers to be gainfully employed.

    Stop stressing creativity, that is not a teachable subject. It is much more innate. Creativity constantly happens for everyone and anyone living life. The ideas come and always will come for creative people.
    Any designer lacking basic ability in rendering or expressing their ideas is a liability to a company and not an asset.

  16. link to this comment by Rhonda Arntsen Fri Apr 15, 2005

    As a design educator, I often find it difficult to get students to understand the balance between the "conceptual" and the "technical".

    I agree with Ellen that "the notion of conceptual thinking.” needs to be demystified. So many believe that the term "conceptual" refers to something beyond the formulation of ideas; something impractical or giving meaning to something only a priviledged few will understand. On the flip side, mastery of technology does not equate to pushing buttons without making marks.

    Balance of idea and appropriate delivery of the idea is what to be sought after.

    Thank you for such a wonderful article.

  17. link to this comment by Daniel Pagan Mon Apr 18, 2005

    "The highest level of success for a designer or artist is, in my view, to create work that influences others in the field (or better yet, people in other fields)"

    Q: Does the success of influencing others in and outside the field surpass the success of communicating a particular message? Or is this one in the same?

    This raised a red flag for me. Without being to critical of the statement (it's intent is clear), it could be important to caution against work influencing to heavily (other designers/practitioners) with respect to the concept of "hero worship".

    In EMIGRE NO. 66, Ben Hagon briefly—but succinctly—discusses this phenomenon i.e. "A culture of hero worship prevents young designers from approaching design differently. If all a new designer has as inspiration is somebody else's work or approach to work, he or she cannot be expected to think originally."


    "Art enrichment is over. It was the notion propagated in the 1950s that everyone should learn to understand and appreciate art, thus making people more sensitive and cultivated."

    I understand and agree with the notion of developing our sensitivity via rehabilitation of existing educational programs/policies. However, while the redevelopment of current educational practices is implemented, "learning to understand and appreciate art, thus making people more sensitive and cultivated" via enrichment, is surely still a reliable model. Isn't it?

    "Enrichment is, by definition, a luxury."

    I don't fully agree—by definition alone—enrichment to be considered a luxury. I believe it to be more a social definition—which begs the question, why?


    "Its a shame that we have to have this discussion."

    Hi James. Surely you understand that having this discussion is no shame at all. We should all agree that these discussions are paramount and serve to advance our field. I find it hard to foresee any area of study/profession existing and progressing with out this kind of discourse.

    Great article Ellen. Thanks. I have pulled a lot from it; including, a list of skills to check by.

    If anyone is interested in reading another great article on design education, link over to Jonathan Baldwin's, "Graphic Design Education is Failing Students." here: http://tinyurl.com/dagoy

  18. link to this comment by Mark Shepherd Thu Apr 21, 2005

    As an educator - I too find it difficult to teach concept and technical skills. I can see the students that approach their process in a much more intuitive and rigorous manner. And others that simply avoid, skip any possibilities and early investigation. It seems skills develop through doing and time invested. (something we lack in a 15 week course) Actually looking back on my own education - technical skills did not develop until maybe 5 years or so out of school - when I was using the software consistently on a daily basis. I am making the assumption that the desired skills for students today are different than 20 years ago? One must be a highly skilled production artist, a technologist, as well as a conceptual thinker - to succeed as a designer today? I remember these as goals back in 1986 - software changed that - soon there were those skilled in specific software packages, etc - (I won't go there)

    I am not sure ideas need to be limited to tools. Yes tools dictate the look and form of the ideas - the computer seems to me a wonderful tool to access and expand concepts quickly, intuitively. I have heard this arguement so many times - this nostalgic desire to return to "skills and craft" that is currently missing from design methodology? It seems to me in this "post-skill studio" environment that there are MORE tools and skills to actually master - and ideas can be more fully renedered - but this requires moving beyond mastering the pencil and paper. I think in this day students are immediately using the computer simply because it is more comfortable as a tool to generate concepts. It is as immediate, allows for variety and is closer to the finsished form - a pencil sketch seems foreign and unrelated.

    I would love to hear ideas on alternatives to the dreaded critique! I have to agree this model can be unsuccessful. Also - how do other motivate and keep students interested in the value of craft and software proficiency. So often I see the students usse the computer to generate their first idea - when I see the computer as a tool to generate several.

    Maybe the computer could be taught or thought of as a tool to generate ideas - (like a pencil) rather than production / craft / alone? Then these two skill sets would meld together in one tool.

  19. link to this comment by Mark Shepherd Thu Apr 21, 2005

    I thought this made some sense to - this idea of mutation - and a revolution in skill sets?

    Mr. Heller:
    http://www.aiga.org/content.cfm?CategoryID=179

  20. link to this comment by Caroline Lewis Wed Apr 27, 2005

    Wonderful article. Isn't all education to provide the student with 'skills' to understand, bring things (projects) to fruition, regardless of medium, visual art, written, built, etc.
    Yes, it is what has been lacking and obviously needed at this time in modern society where the curiuosity and 'paths of logic' available to most people are lacking or missing. This article I perceive supports the notion of life skills and how to access ones abilities and self relience, which somewhere got lost in the shuffle of academic discourse in the education of students, which is sad.
    The tactile world of an art student could only be accesible with the knowledge of the how's. Better to leave the mindfulness, the critique, the conceptual mind for a short while to then combine with it again to THEN actually create. The process (especially the technical) usually has many lessons to give!

  21. link to this comment by Jennifer Wed May 04, 2005

    Call this far-fetched but isn’t the role of a designer to communicate? All design is a combination of form and function. So yes, technical skills are necessary? but you can teach anyone technical skills. Don’t get me wrong, a good knowledge of typography, the printing process, papers, finishes, photo editing, web page development, etc? is of vital importance to creating any type of professional piece. However, it is the CONTENT that really matters. Aesthetics should come secondary to the message. A designer’s job is to communicate. The client gives that designer a product, a news story, an event, a piece of literature, etc? and the designer’s job is to extract the message from that information and deliver it to the audience in the most effective way possible. No computer software program or amount of spot color is going to do that for you.

    Think of it this way its your husband/wife/mother’s birthday, you have two boxes, inside one (box a) is a nice fancy pen, inside the other (box b) is a beautiful handcrafted scrapbook, created and personalized for the receiver. You wrap box a in expensive shiny gift-wrap with brilliant gold ribbon and a bow, you wrap box b with wallpaper that is yellowing and wrinkled, saved from the receiver’s first bedroom or home. Package A will look much nicer. This is the equivalent of fine technical skills. Package B will catch the viewer though, despite the imperfect wrapping. And they will open both boxes, and they will say wow what a nice pen and set it aside and you’ll be lucky if they use it once, but they will look at the scrap book for hours, go back to it day after day, and they will hold on to it forever. This is what good design is - a concept - an idea that is targeted at the intended audience that will impact them, move them and stay with them. Or to put it as one of my favorite journalists did once “we [journalists] are out there trying to cross an ocean – to get the information over to the other side, and without designers we would be drowning in the water – but design gives us a boat.” Our job is to build a ship that doesn’t sink, and that gets the message to the other side in the most efficient way possible. Beautiful sails, intricate carvings, and gold plated rails don’t keep a ship afloat. They will make that ship even better than the rest, but unless the ship is built to be sturdy, swift and to stay afloat, those details won’t matter. Designers need to build the ship – send the message across – without that, they will go right down with the ship.

    (I should add here that I may be biased, I am a junior at a liberal arts university with a double major in journalism – visual comm. and anthropology. 80% of the classes that I take have nothing to do with design, but they teach me to think, to communicate, and to problem solve. I bring those skills to design projects and every time, without fail, end up with a great result, and happy clients – not to mention a beautiful design, and this is where the technical skills come in to play – but the heart and soul of the piece is the message? Maybe if I went to a design school I would feel differently, as you may. Feel free to respond and criticize).

  22. link to this comment by Thomas Kerr Mon May 09, 2005

    The computer has certainly added complexity to arts education and in many institutions its emergence has too often supplanted sound basics. The greatest victim of this unwitting skill erosion is that of drawing.

    A common thread in all graphic disciplines, this central visualiziation practice seems to be set-aside in contemporary arts pedagogy. Far too often, students pass off computer-generated work that is little more than imitation and/or variation of what they imagine passes for professional standards. The computer is facile, so they too become facile.

    The computer has revolutionized the design studio, but it should not run it. Students who cannot reliably use a t-square have no place behind the screens of these wonderful tools. That is-until they can compose, create and visualize their ideas first as sketches. Stand behind the concepts and practices they have learnt rather than ape the graphic expression of others.

    A good example of this would be the crowd of design practitioners working on the "bleeding edge" of web design. Everything becomes so much like everything else, we-the end user-are left with nothing but facile banality. A less visually literate public tacitly nods approval and our culture is poorer for it.

    I would not call for a return to the salon tradition, but rather an appreciation of process, the getting a good idea down on paper. Working up the composition from scratch and using that plan create an original finish. A computer in the hands of a graphic artist-so trained-is a much more versatile, expressive tool.

    Presently we are very near the point where many cannot even identify what constitutes a good drawing. To watch this artistic turn of events unfold is sobering indeed. Perhaps design curricula should include courses where nothing is due but the sketches of what the finish may be, projects where the grade is associated with the caliber of concept and composition rather than the illusion of perfection so convincingly produced by a silicon chip.

  23. link to this comment by Natasha Thu May 12, 2005

    Such a lively discussion-- and one that seems to flow seamlessly from the conversations I am having in the halls of my own institution.

    As one who works on developing grading and feedback rubrics with art and design teachers from a number of disciplines, I am particularly interested in articulating criteria for good concepts. Criteria for technical skills and craftsmanship are far easier.

    While there is obviously a level of innate creativity that allows students to come up with great concpts, I do believe that we CAN teach students to be good conceptual thinkers. But the ones who are having trouble with the conceptual aspect are all too often told that they just aren't getting "it." We owe it to our students to be able to explain "it."

    I welcome any rubrics or criteria lists out there for great concepts. Thanks!

  24. link to this comment by Charles Salmela Fri May 13, 2005

    Natasha,

    Your comments reflect the significant problem not only with art education but contemporary society in general. The balance of intellect (reason) and creativity (vision) appears to be in a state of limbo. However perception of the order of things may just come with age.

    There are countless answers as there are rivers that run into the same ocean. So the answer is the perception of the ocean. For me it is the sum of experience of life in a holistic manner. All the elements of the natural cycles. The patterns formed being the substructure of the dance. Artists use these life elements and patterns to form life within life (so to speak). In the end, proper art is a mirror of the natural unchanging essence.

    By most of the comments I have read on this AIGA site the level of discussion does not mirror our classical and historical inheritance. Visual or otherwise. Conceptual dreamers must support their forms via the natural scene awakened each new day. We do not create it. We are a reflection of it. The feedback rubrics can only be in relation to the holistic and unchanging patterns of the cosmic ocean if they are coherent design concepts. The loss of this perception will truly be tragic for our global society, and your concern is very significant.

  25. link to this comment by kris Tue Aug 23, 2005

    The thing about creativity is that boundaries in your technical skills limit the flight of the mind. If you did not know that Flash could do this,or Photoshop could do that then how are you to create against the perverbial grain.

  26. link to this comment by Erin Gartz Wed Oct 25, 2006

    The main role of a designer is to communicate a message. Design is a combination of form and how you use that form. Technical skills can be taught but you need the reason or content to produce the message. A designer's job is to extract the message from the information they are given and present it to the audience to the best solution possible. Computer programs cannot create the reason behind the image, only the designer can. You cannot have just the technical skills and expect a program to do the work for you.

  27. link to this comment by Reema Zoumut Tue Jan 22, 2008

    As an art educator, this article has brought up a lot of issues.

    History, Critiques, drawing skills, software knowledge, etc. are all needed for a well-rounded art education/ enrichment. In the past, wasn’t EDUCATION itself an enrichment? Only for the wealthy. A luxury. And now, we need it for survival and success. I see the ARTS as the end result of a basic education. Basic education? The knowledge of science, math, literacy, history and much more to be able to create. You need the foundation of knowledge to able to create our message, our expression, our artistic style. Yes, the next level of education.

    History should be looked at as wonderful reference(s), because most of our concepts has been done before, but what will be your twist on the message/ style.

    My students do artist reports every other month. I love the “ohs & ahs” when I give them the list of artists they can choose from. They spend the whole period surfing the internet at the art that others have created. There will always be the arrogant students that thinks history doesn’t matter, but I try and let them know that our creations can change and influence the world. Ex. Piccasso had the world stop and think, when he painted Guernica for the World Fair.

    Critiques are another creative reference to develop your style/ message. Critiques are great sources to appease curiosity or ambition of how every one in the class had solved the assignment, problem, or challenge. Learning how it could look other's artwork or to “beef-up” your solution. It always amazes me how you can give 32 students the same “challenge” and they all have a different solution.

    As for technique & skills… I think some of you are confused with fine arts and graphic (commercial) art. Fine arts express your own inner message and graphics are some one else’s message. They are not the same. Learn the your skills, so you can full through successfully on ideas & concepts. When a child is first learning math, they learn the basics with NO calculator but use it later after the student knows the process. Wouldn't be the same for the art student? For the art student, know the elements & princples of art, then jump to the next process?

    So, it seems to be an advantage to the artist that knows the computer and it software to be able to create their message/ style. The more knowledge we have in our brains, the more success we have for our art and lives. A computer is a tool. If that’s the tool you grow-up with and are comfortable with… does it matter that you start the creative process with, the pencil and paper or the computer. It is the artist decision on the tool of choice.

    If art is pushed aside as a luxury, and we only give it importance to it in the higher years of education. We’ll lose the edge of America own pride. The creativity and want, to be ourselves; to think for ourselves. To be who we want to be – you need knowledge (from history to critiques), to know how to get there.

  28. link to this comment by Robert Henry Wed Oct 15, 2008

    Having suffered the indignity of an Australian Art school studying a Bachelor Degree that lead to nothing. I cannot agree more with this article.

    I went to art school to learn how to paint and draw and was taught nothing but endless crits, which were directed by students who didn't know anything because they hadn't been taught anything. At one point my Lecturer questioned why they bothered with composition diagrams in Art History texts after I used these outlines as a basis for an abstract painting. Quite clearly My Professor knew as little about practical painting as she did about abstract painting, her supposed area of 'skill'.

    The tragedy of this is students waste money and time and get nothing out of an instition which could skill and empower them through knowledge and skills for life, but instead means they often have to retrain after they graduate.Like me I went to Law school...

  29. link to this comment by Marc Lawrence Fri Nov 14, 2008

    I am currently enrolled in a graphic design program after graduating with a BFA and spending 10 years in the work world in a design related field. I would say that the current program I'm in is focused on ideas and concept with skills being a bit secondary. My feeling is that skills can be learned (especially with software) through training books, practice and repitition whereas learning to conceptualize is better learned through in class teaching. Skills are indeed important and should be aquired in order to properly execute ideas but I feel the focus during school should be conceptualizing. What good are great skills with nothing to apply them to?

Add a Comment

AIGA encourages thoughtful, responsible discourse. Please add comments judiciously, and refrain from maligning any individual, institution or body of work.