Design Students Cannot Think?

Part 1
by Charles S. Naidu

A design student's conversion into adulthood is inevitable in the natural psychosocial development process. The individual grow and experience various aspects of life, acquiring experiences in areas defined by their wants and needs in a holistic manner. Humanity as it seems are defining their goals as they go along a path towards their designated goals and objectives, whether as an individual or corporately as a nation or groups. 

In the vast field of Design, conversion takes place as a transition of thought patterns and perception. Ideas are born based on the needs to create and to improve the quality of life. The young person who has been experiencing life for their first eighteen years, has acquired enough information to realise that what they have acquired is not yet their achievement. In this age, the very word success has been redefined and the same can be made about the word failure. Much of these are based on different approaches to educating the young about effort to succeed or perhaps progress in specific areas based on differently-abled individuals. Enlightened designers today are moving towards creating more IP, filing more copyrights, winning more awards and having their work commercialized even more. 

Why is that? Many have asked this question especially design educators. Is this all just cosmetics? Can art and design students actually express themselves? This article isn't about students' expressing themselves but rather a thought about how can Design students grow up and explore more sustainable approaches and get busy exploring uncharted branches of design expressions and philosophy?

Babies are born and they go through a long process of growing up. The same can be said about thought patterns. The thinking of our students is like old tape recorders, which plays the same tune day in and day out. Primary and secondary school education delivery has greatly contributed to this. Much stress and emphasis on studying and scoring exam papers, furthermore to produce much anticipated 'A' grade for SPM/'O' Levels for example. Unfortunately this culture has seeped into the art and design field thus greatly diminishing the quality of analytical and critical thinking among the young. 

Students' have been greatly dependent on their teacher's guidance on just about anything due to fulfilling appropriate and correct standards; strictly enforced from time to time. Students' have no room for mistakes and mistakes are often viewed as illegitimate ideas or in other words, 'wrong'. It can be agreeable that mathematical and factual data has dimensional elements in which one cannot dispute its logical conclusions. However, when it comes to conceptual thinking, subjectivity must be also allowed for the student to ask questions freely without fear of ridicule. Ridicule here means, 'asking a silly question'. Teachers had the habit to labeling legitimate questions as stupid questions, silly, illogical and worse still, 'useless' or 'worthless'. At times, perhaps teachers are the overthinkers themselves. 

Unfortunately for some students, these labels fall directly on them. Teachers habitually place value on what deems do be correct answers too quickly which resulted in students struggle to achieve what has been deemed to be the correct standards set by their educators or so called educational standards. Negative or positive reinforcement methods to create efficient students have also produced result-oriented students. Therefore this result-oriented culture has not actually contributed to the development of this country. Not that result-oriented is not a good thing. But its how we achieve these good results makes the 'result-oriented' methodologies more sustainable! Otherwise we are just dealing with external cosmetics. 

Very few have realized the potential of their acquired knowledge. Most have achieved higher qualification because they were primarily directed to fiscal revenue. It is the assumption which states higher qualification equals bigger salaries. However, it appears to be quite the opposite. Some have said, earning big qualifications like a PhD in Design doesn't make them earn well. A full time artist with just a high school certificate probably earns better! However, its not all about the money and commercialization. That is just the surface. That is only 'milk'. Its time these students eat more 'meat' or eat more solids. So the point is this. Milk isn't enough.

Overdependence on digital tools,  generative artificial intelligence and aesthetics just to commercialize one's work is not enough, not only 'milk'.  Having a balance diet with solids would mean, changing their thought patterns, which they have been used to, all these years. By changing or re-arranging their way of thinking, they are redefining success and what changing or re-arranging their way of thinking, can be considered as a solution. Students in the art and design field actually have the power to redefine the quality of life, not to make life better but to make life worth living and to design with integrity. Having a balance diet of 'milk and solids' will open their mind and doors to more important discussions, dialogues and philosophy of design, rooting the foundation of design education firmly on a rock.