Envisioning Futures of Design Education: An Exploratory Workshop with Design Educators

A Description of the Workshop Toolkit

The toolkit developed for the workshop included a set of trigger cards (some depicted images and others contained text; see Figure 1 for examples), along with large paper, markers and glue. The cards were sorted into five categories titled People, Places, Roles, Skills and Statements. These five categories were identified by the workshop facilitators as some of the key components to visualizing any future visions for design education. People and Places cards contained images; People cards depicted images of people — mostly individuals — and some others depicted groups. Places cards depicted images of different places — some indoors and some outdoors. Roles, Skills and Statement cards contained text. Roles and Skills cards contained one or two words (e.g., “Learner,” “Making Sense”), supported by a brief description elaborating upon that “role” or “skill”. The Statements cards contained short statements, such as, “Design can lead change.” Content on the cards could be interpreted in many different ways, including some associated with education and / or design. An inclusive trigger set was created to ensure that diverse options for instigating ideas and thinking were presented in the images or the text, and that there was no single dominating theme that pervaded the subject matter inherent in these. The images of people depicted in the People cards represented diverse age groups, ethnicity, and genders; the visuals depicted in the Places cards represented diverse settings such as indoor spaces, outdoor places and abstract visualizations of environments. Additionally, the toolkit included Wild Cards, which were blank cards. Participants could use them to add words and sketches of their own choosing. Overall, the complete set of trigger cards contained content that was quite broadly constituted, yet it also connected to the main ideas that would be presented by the individuals who acted as catalysts / facilitators in each of the four future scenarios. The participants had the option to use all, some or none of the images and text from the toolkit to build a visual collage on a large sheet of paper that represented their ideas about the future of design education in the context of one of the presented future scenarios.

Workshop Participants

The 40 + people who participated in the workshop included design educators and students from academic institutions located in many different countries, including the Netherlands, Germany, Denmark, Sweden, Switzerland, the United Kingdom, Hong Kong, Australia, and the United States.

Workshop Facilitators

The six workshop facilitators were design educators from five different university-level, educational institutions who each possessed varying levels of design education experience and expertise. Three of the facilitators are the co-authors of this report. Sapna Singh is a design researcher, strategist and Lecturer at The Ohio State University in the US; Liz Sanders is a Design Research consultant and an Associate Professor of Design at The Ohio State University; Terry Irwin is the Head of the School of Design at Carnegie Mellon University in the US; Pieter Jan Stappers is a faculty member of Industrial Design Engineering at Delft University of Technology in The Netherlands; Nicole Lotz is a Lecturer at the Open University in the UK; Erik Bohemia is the Program Director in the Institute for Design Innovation at Loughborough University in the UK.

Figure 1: An example of trigger cards from the toolkit representing each of the five categories: People, Places, Roles, Skills and Statements. The cards were double-sided with the category names printed on one side and with an image or text printed on the other.

Workshop Outline

The 90-minute workshop was divided into the following three parts:

1. Presentation of future scenarios: The workshop began with a presentation of four future scenarios by the facilitators. The five-minute presentation that introduced each scenario concluded with one or more questions for participants to consider regarding the overarching concept of visioning the future of design education.
2. Participatory design activity: The workshop participants organized themselves into groups of five to seven members. All of those sitting at a given table typically formed a group. Each group chose to discuss one of the future scenarios and visualize some aspects of what the future of design education might be like in the context of that scenario. The groups discussed the scenario, browsed through the toolkit, selected cards that could communicate their ideas about how and why specific aspects regarding the future of design education might evolve or need to be addressed, and then used the cards to create a visual collage on a large (roughly 36” x 48”) sheet of paper. They were also encouraged to add drawings and words of their own choosing to the collage.
3. Presentation of Visions: The workshop concluded with each group presenting their visions for the future of design education — as articulated in their collages — that highlighted the particular array of possibilities, concerns and contextual factors and issues that they felt could or should affect the future of design education. All of the presentations were audio and video-recorded so that the critical dialogues that occurred in and around them could be referenced to provide information and insights to future researchers.

Scenario #1: DRAW (Designing, Reading, Arithmetic and Writing) Authored and presented by Liz Sanders and Sapna Singh

The DRAW (Designing, Reading, Arithmetic and Writing) scenario described a future where designing forms the core of a K–12 curriculum together with reading, arithmetic and writing (Figure 2). (K–12 is a term that, in many parts of the US and Canada, refers to primary / elementary, middle and high school education for children aged 5 to 18 years.) This curriculum has three stages:

1. Foundation in Grades K–3: Students collaborate with their peers and family members to understand and develop concrete design knowledge, such as the process of developing a concept or idea and giving form to it. Students also develop foundational skills in empathy and collaboration. Teachers, designers and curriculum developers collaborate to develop toolkits for use in this effort. Children learn about designing through fun, hands-on experiences. They have classes, and workshops in making, repairing, reusing, and repurposing.
2. Exploration in Grades 4–7: Students collaborate with local community members, including families in the neighborhood, businesses, and social and government organizations to tackle and design solutions that meet local community-based needs. The curriculum is project-based, and would bring together knowledge from multiple subject areas relevant to the context that surrounds a given project. Students learn about co-designing and develop toolkits to use in collaborative activities. Hacking (i.e., taking things apart to use the parts to make new things or facilitate better ways of doing things) is introduced in Grade 6.
3. Innovation in Grades 8–12: Students collaborate with social and public organizations to take on real world projects. They explore co-designing with community members across their region, their nation and internationally. Students develop their own co-design toolkits from hybrid (i.e., physical and digital) materials. They learn to effectively engage in the iterative processes of design by practicing it.

Figure 2: Graphic representation of the DRAW (Designing, Reading, Arithmetic and Writing) scenario for primary / elementary (grades K–3; five- to eight-year-old children), middle (grades 4–7; nine- to twelve-year-old children) and high school (grades 8–12; thirteen- to eighteen-year-old children) education.

In this scenario, meaningful, sustained collaboration among teachers, families and the local community plays a significant role. In the DRAW scenario, the primary goal of K–12 education is to develop smart citizens who will be prepared to be agents of positive change. This scenario will require changes to be made in current assessment standards to place greater emphasis on multicultural, social and humanistic levels of achievement. The primary question was: When designing forms the core of K-12 curricula, together with reading, writing and arithmetic, how will higher education in Design change?

Scenario #2: The Cosmopolitan Localist Authored and presented by Terry Irwin

The Cosmopolitan Localist scenario offered a framework for interdisciplinary education. This scenario is premised on the idea that, by 2030, a global network of Cosmopolitan Localist (CL) Universities would arise in which design will have evolved to be a core discipline on every campus (Figure 3). These universities will serve local and regional populations, and will be linked in their global exchange of knowledge and technology. In this new structure, academic disciplines will offer specialized learning and expertise that is embodied and applied in transdisciplinary collaboration that addresses place-based problems. Place-based problems are problems that are very specific to a location and require designing solutions that address its unique context. Faculty and students will ‘toggle’ between their home discipline and projects that have been undertaken within transdisciplinary labs to work on place-based projects and research. Faculty and students will often work in co-learning relationships in areas where deep expertise either does not yet exist or has been forgotten by 21st century societies. CL Universities will maintain close ties with local government / policy makers, social, political and environmental activists and entire communities, as well as a wide range of industry and non-profit partners.

The primary questions for the workshop participants to consider were: What does a day-in-the-life of a CLU student look like? What are the core disciplines? What does it mean to be local? What does it mean to be cosmopolitan?

The CL universities will have a common set of ‘core’ disciplines that are scaffolded by complementary disciplines representative of local / regional conditions, expertise, cultures and economy. Faculty and students will collaborate on projects, knowledge exchange, and best practices via technological interactions and physical exchanges. CL universities will provide spaces for students and faculty to participate in place-based community projects, take courses and conduct research (these form the “co-design labs” depicted at the center of Figure 3). CL students and faculty will visit traditional universities to make deeper dives into areas of knowledge or expertise that are embedded within a particular discipline or area of speciality. All CL students will take courses in two to four required ‘gateway’ disciplines, and design will be one of these. These courses will provide a practical and theoretical foundation for place-based learning and problem-solving that emphasizes global awareness and responsibility. Students will customize degree pathways and spend about 75 % of their time in transdisciplinary collaboration.

CL universities will be situated in areas where at least some indigenous flora / fauna remain so that the natural, place-based constraints and resources can inform solutions. Each CL University will be structured to help the students enrolled in it develop skills, knowledge and disciplines relevant to their particular eco-system. This is a cornerstone principle of place-based design. The University will transform into a catalyst for positive social and environmental change. Design and designers will play key roles in formulating and guiding this transformation.

Figure 3: A graphical representation of the network of individuals, organizations and communities that are connected by co-design labs to Cosmopolitan Localist Universities.

Scenario #3: DesignX Authored and presented by Pieter Jan Stappers

The DesignX scenario [10] highlights the expanding role of design and designers in modern societies around the world. Over the course of the last century, the primary intent of design has broadened from being a means to invent and distribute products to being a means to develop and effectively implement interfaces, interactions, experiences, services and now complex systems, where making a change involves contributions from many parties and actors. Examples of some of these complex systems are energy supply, healthcare services and mobility / transportation.

The change from domain-bound to purpose-driven design has led to designers’ being involved in development efforts which surpass disciplines and domains. This expansion in what designers now “do” has positioned them to be involved in decision-making processes that shape public policy, affect socio-cultural and socio-economic agendas and activities, and inform thinking that impacts the functionality of civic and technological infrastructures. These newer activities of designing — identifying, framing and formulating new ways to address a wide variety of problematic situations through inventive and innovative practices — bind them together, especially when guided by a human-centered perspective. All those involved in efforts that endeavor to positively change complex systems will need to be able to operationalize design skills to varying degrees to effectively contribute to the development of these systems. These skills will include creativity, project management, communication, collaboration, empathy, prototyping and evaluation.

Figure 4: A visual representation of the progression of the types of design repre-sented in the DesignX scenario, and what skills are taught at each level.

Partnerships will be formed around the systems of the domain of a given problematic situation, such as energy supply, healthcare services and mobility / transportation. For example, co-designing a new way to organize and effectively facilitate elder care across the community will require the constructive engagement of a broad cross-section of citizens, social and healthcare organizations, civil authorities, health insurance providers and designers. These collaborations are all integral to both the effective maintenance of the operation of this type of complex system as well as the exploration of new initiatives that could improve or replace it.

Cross-disciplinary development will bring together various disciplines, each with its own tools and materials, and each with its own ways of planning, doing and assessing. Models, materials, tools, and languages will need to be developed to connect and effectively manage the contributions of the different parties at the intersections, interfaces and overlaps that will occur between disciplines. The challenge in developing, implementing and effectively sustaining complex systems lies not in making a single predictable, perfect-forever solution, but in evolving solutions as they develop. This requires training that needs to take place in vivo (possibly in ‘living labs’). This requires a sustained and high-level of involvement in the development of the system from various societal partners, as well as in the design activities that must occur to support that development. Each set of partners will need to be educated so that they acquire the requisite skills and understandings. By 2030, digital technologies will have matured to support large-scale information transfer, coordination of collaboration and consolidation of results. We will have developed ways to develop and prototypically test in vivo systems and services, and all involved (users, designers, managers) will be more able to easily shift between being part of running a given system to making smaller or larger changes within them. Making actual and possible changes visible to users, designers and managers, and synchronizing / harmonizing the actions of this diverse set of actors will be the main challenge.

In this scenario, the primary question posed to workshop participants was: What design skills and understandings do ‘all involved’ need?

Scenario #4: Distant-and-Yet-So-Close Authored and presented by Nicole Lotz and Erik Bohemia

The “Distant-and-Yet-So-Close” scenario proposed that a key approach for effectively facilitating distance education in design in the near-future will be to make learning relevant and “close” to an individual learner’s areas of interest as well as his or her physical location, and to be structured and delivered in a manner that helps him or her develop a feeling of belonging and responsibility. Design students working in this scenario collaborate with a variety of stakeholders. They include, but are not limited to, learners studying in a wide variety of disciplines, as well as external stakeholders and experts from maker spaces, private companies, and public organizations such as “not-for-profits.”

In this scenario, distance learners seeking to build knowledge and gain skills in design are advised and guided by a mix of artificial intelligence (AI), local expertise and online tutor groups. A ‘closer to home’ tutor such as a local design practitioner / teacher guides the design student throughout their learning journey. Individuals and communities of users utilize online-facilitated communications to assess and validate the outcomes of design processes, as well as design services and interactions that individual learners or groups of learners have created.

Additionally, planning and operating this scenario requires the maintenance of effective relations with the personnel who manage and operate local maker spaces,[a] community mending groups and workshops. Doing this effectively is central to distance learners’ exposure to hands-on designing, and the iterative, heuristically informed processes that guide it. Local companies, ranging from corporations to start-ups and local shops and small businesses, offer limited services freely or at greatly reduced rates to the distance learners, and may also offer them apprenticeships, internships or limited opportunities to practice what they have learned. Distance learners also have opportunities to contribute to the realization of local community or government projects that have been formulated to design new services and interactions.

The Distant-and-Yet-So-Close scenario is guided by a project-based curriculum that facilitates a range of projects, which include designing objects, systems and services for individuals or groups living in “the real world,” as well as abstract, theoretical or philosophically motivated assignments. Cooperative and collaborative curriculum components are derived from the distance learners’ online social networks and local communities. A dynamic and intelligent curriculum (AI) suggests projects to the distance learner based on social, cultural, economic or even political relevance to him or her and proximity to his or her community. As distance learners gain more experience with design processes, they gain more autonomy to choose the content that constitutes their curriculum. By being integrated within online and offline communities that operate close to the distance learner’s physical location, he or she will feel more responsible, and become more socially integrated and more adept at engaging in lifelong learning. Learning to design in close proximity to an individual or group’s communities of interest can promote the transformation of projects that were intended to merely satisfy a particular set of learning objectives into projects that become actualized and incorporated into the daily life of the community. Community integration and life-relevance are key to lifelong and self-directed design learning. Physical tools for prototyping and production are sourced from locally available maker spaces, local workshops, and local services (these include but are not limited to 2D and 3D printing).

The virtual tools used to facilitate design activities in this scenario are twofold: first, a central, map-based Virtual Learning Environment (VLE) (shown in Figure 5) connects learners and other stakeholders with objects, services and specific design applications that are acquired on demand. Second, distance design education will be orchestrated and facilitated virtually, but will still be anchored in physical spaces. With each new project, the VLE lists all live and past projects on a map.

The primary questions posed to workshop participants in context of this scenario were: How do we accredit ubiquitous, lifelong distance learning in the future? If the educational institutions are calling for lifelong, ubiquitous learning, then do we still need traditional accreditation? Who will accredit learning and with what goal(s)? Which elements of learning will be assessed and accredited, and how will this occur?

Figure 5: A collage of a new type of VLE — a Map-based app that depicts stakeholders, learners and workshops in physical proximity to a new project being created

Future visions based on the DRAW scenario

Groups 1, 3 and 5 developed their visions based on the DRAW scenario.

Group 1 (whose visualization is depicted in Figure 6) identified that design’s being added to the core of the learning experiences that constitute K-12 education would cause greater emphasis to be placed on creative disciplines. First year students in undergraduate design will be more effectively prepared to use design knowledge and skills, while students entering disciplines outside design will be familiar with some aspects of design processes. Design learning will extend beyond classroom lecturing and the studio environment. This will result in students being able to collaborate with various constituent groups within their communities and explore the natural environment to improve less-than-desirable situations within and around them. The three wild cards (circled) — more variety, complex thinking and global interest — highlight the central ideas articulated in this visualization. Students will also need more variety regarding the types of learning experiences they are immersed in, and this will require options beyond classroom lecturing to be facilitated. Designing will involve introducing students to complex thinking, which will allow them to be braver, and to learn to experiment and take chances. Learners would need to think of design at a global scale, and learn to negotiate solutions that require collaboration, active listening and communication.

Group 3 (whose visualization is depicted in Figure 7) identified that K–12 students who are exposed to and immersed in design-based learning experiences will enter the university with a rich skill set in design, equipped with abilities to create, collaborate and observe with curiosity and a sense of activism. This is depicted in the visuals that occupy the upper half of the visualization. The group recognized that not everyone coming out of high school would become a professional designer. Design tools and methods will be integrated into many other disciplines. Students will pursue a Masters’ degree or a PhD specializing in Design after earning an undergraduate degree in another discipline in addition to design. The lower half of this visualization highlights the outcomes of higher education captured through Statements Cards that characterize the transdisciplinary nature of design and Roles Cards that highlight leadership roles that students would be prepared to assume. Group 3 also contended that these students would be more well-prepared to use their experiences in higher education to become the kinds of social, civic and corporate leaders who would be able to anticipate and navigate ambiguous circumstances. Utilizing their knowledge of design skills and processes, students in every discipline would be brave enough to identify, frame and tackle systems-level problems and / or soft and wicked problems.

Figure 6 (l): Visualization for the Future of Design Education created by Group 1.

Figure 7 (r): Visualization for the Future of Design Education created by Group 3.

Group 5 (whose visualization is depicted in Figure 8) identified that, in the DRAW scenario, K–12 students who have been educated to plan and operate design processes would enter the university as design literates who possess diverse skills, bases of knowledge, and interests. As a result, these students’ career paths would not be linear or constrained within a rigid curriculum. The design program would be designed to be an immersive learning experience. In this type of learning context, faculty and students would be co-learners who work together to create experiences within which different types of knowledge and understandings could be discovered or constructed. For example, a student possessing design skills around health and alternative economics would explore learning by using different lenses such as political, health, and business economics in the foundation phase. Being educated in this way would also allow students to explore different disciplinary domains and would encourage them to become more broad-minded explorers of society. These learning experiences may conclude with students actively defining and shaping their particular social and cultural roles, which may not exist yet, in a society that will require people to be more nimble learners and thinkers. Towards the end of this type of design program, students enrolled in it will begin exploring what kinds of impacts — socially, technologically, economically, politically — they want to have on society, or some portion(s) of it, as a designers. This concept is depicted in the lower part of the visualization. The group represented the idea that “We break apart the missionary” in a torn role card. This type of design program will prepare design students to be brave leaders and visionaries who will need to be mobile, adaptable to changing situations and who can shape their own education.

Figure 8: Visualization for the Future of Design Education created by Group 5

Visions based on the DesignX scenario

Groups 4 and 6 developed their visions on the DesignX scenario.

Group 4 (whose visualization is depicted in Figure 9) presented the argument that, in the context of the DesignX scenario, all of the students enrolled in a design program need not learn “everything.” They contended that most design students will embark on their respective learning experiences having formed their own ambitions or ideas about what they want to learn or want to become. The Role Card “learner” sits at the center of their visualization, from which radiate “arms” comprised of trigger cards depicting combinations of images and key words that together form descriptions of distinct learning personas. One of these personas describes Nina, a university student and futurist, with a horticultural background who is interested in exploring space agriculture. Since design surpasses boundaries imposed by disciplines and domains, and is structured to facilitate peer-to-peer learning, the students in the design class Nina is enrolled in will learn as much from each other as they would from their professors. This idea is highlighted by the heading for the poster that states: “We learn a lot — but not from you”. In this visualization for the future, design students will learn with their Professors and Instructors — as co-learners — rather than from them.

Group 6 (whose visualization is depicted in Figure 10) focused on identifying key skills and roles required for design students to work towards. These are articulated in the “Roles” and “Skills” cards that flank each side of the column of visuals that appears in the center of their collage. The primary roles identified for future designers are explorer, futurist, visionary, inventor and activist. The primary skills these designers would have to possess include learning by doing, storytelling, negotiation, bravery, visualization and collaboration.

The need for bravery is highly relevant to the Explorer role, which Group 6 identified on their visualization using their “Wild Card,” that requires thinking in new ways. They also offered that behaving in the role of an activist means 1) actually having and then effectively articulating a point of view, and 2) considering diverse social and cultural value systems and ethical positions about topics such as intellectual property, privacy and inequality. Group 6 identified that “What makes the designers ‘stand out’ is their skill in storytelling ... [and using this] to meaningfully engage with different types of people.” The other key ability designers learning within this vision will cultivate effectively is visualization, which was described by the group as having the skill and knowledge necessary to create something that is visually and conceptually compelling enough to provoke conversation. The group emphasized that in this future scenario the considerations of values, ethics and responsibility would be central to design, placing these as text prominently in the middle of the poster. Additionally, the designers learning within this vision would need to develop skills of playfulness, experimentation and thinking at a global scale (this was not included in their visualization, but was emphasized in their verbal presentation).

Figure 9 (l): Visualization for the Future of Design Education created by Group 4.

Figure 10 (r): Visualization for the Future of Design Education created by Group 6.

Group 2 (whose visualization is depicted shown in Figure 11) developed their vision on the Cosmopolitan Localist scenario. In their vision, the future design student is on a path to discovery and respect for which environment is a core element. The learning spaces in this vision would be designed for reflection, spirituality, introspection, respect towards nature and learning to gain wisdom. Learning would not be separate from the students’ other aspects of life. Family would play an important role in their everyday learning experiences. A typical day would follow the design process, which is represented along the middle spine of their visualization using the Skills Cards of observation, active listening and reflection leading to sense making, collaboration and storytelling. This central spine highlighting skills is supported by visuals chosen from People and Places Cards placed on either side of it. In this scenario knowledge of the local environment and indigenous materials and practices would form the core of the curriculum. Topics such as well-being, health, nourishing and flourishing of communities will be a part of learning. Faculty and students would collaborate on projects as co-learners. Designing as a key to complex problem solving would be directed towards local community problems. The students attracted to this program would have more wisdom and experience behind them and would be interested in taking up leadership roles. This community of learners would be diverse in terms of age and experience.

Figure 11: Visualization for the Future of Design Education created by Group 2