Copyright (c) 2009 Sheffield Hallam University All rights reserved. http://digitalcommons.shu.ac.uk/drs2008/session3/track_c Recent Events in Institutions, Policy & Design en-us Wed, 09 Sep 2009 08:27:53 PDT 3600 http://digitalcommons.shu.ac.uk/drs2008/session3/track_c/3 http://digitalcommons.shu.ac.uk/drs2008/session3/track_c/3 Wed, 16 Jul 2008 16:00:00 PDT This exploratory research examines an under-evaluated aspect of graphic design in the United States: the nature of the profession. Discourse analysis that applies the theory of governmentality is used to assess previously collected, open-ended interviews with graphic designers, as well as other source material. Based on the late work of Michel Foucault, governmentality considers how authorities govern through the creation and dissemination of knowledge, which works through individuals' desires and beliefs and leads to unpredictable outcomes. In this research, two 'authorities' within the graphic design profession are identified and considered - design competitions and graphic design higher education. Both authorities are loose and heterogeneous, spread across many organizations, locations, and individuals. These authorities govern through the creation and production of knowledge about what graphic design is and how to practice it. Governing is evidenced in documents, on Web sites, in education accreditation materials, and via practitioners' and educators' discourse. Governing works through practitioners', educators', and students' desires to have their work validated by their peers, instructors, critics, judges, and the profession. The outcomes of this governing are varied. Practitioners accepted the awards, found external venues for validation, and questioned the structure and nature of the competitions. Educators questioned the composition and premise of graphic design education and shared knowledge about classroom policies. Practitioners questioned the definition of graphic design and its practice learned during schooling. Thus, the theory of governmentality is a tool for illuminating how the graphic design profession in the US governs. This exploratory analysis opens up new questions for graphic design research, education, and practice. Keywords: Graphic Design, Governmentality, Governing, Profession, Design Competitions, Education Kate Ann B. LaMere http://digitalcommons.shu.ac.uk/drs2008/session3/track_c/2 http://digitalcommons.shu.ac.uk/drs2008/session3/track_c/2 Wed, 16 Jul 2008 16:30:00 PDT Recognising the growing importance of design, this paper reports on the development of an approach to measuring design at a national level. A series of measures is proposed, that are based around a simplified model of design as a system at a national level. This model was developed though insights from literature and a workshop with government, industry and design sector representatives. Detailed data on design in the UK is presented to highlight the difficulties in collecting reliable and robust data. Evidence is compared with four countries (Spain, Canada, Korea and Sweden). This comparison highlights the inherent difficulties in comparing performance and a revised set of measures is proposed. Finally, an approach to capturing design spend at a firm level is proposed, based on insights from literature and case studies. Keywords: National Design System, Design Performance James Moultrie http://digitalcommons.shu.ac.uk/drs2008/session3/track_c/1 http://digitalcommons.shu.ac.uk/drs2008/session3/track_c/1 Wed, 16 Jul 2008 17:00:00 PDT This paper explores, from a philosophical and speculative rather than empirical perspective, and within the design disciplines in general, the complex relationships, between practice and education, and their respective assumptions and prejudices. The paper begins by characterising design education from three perspectives: first, education 'about' the discipline, in the sense of providing information that explicates the general disciplinary 'content' and focus; second, education 'for' the discipline, which usually accords to notions of training; and third, education as the 'instilling' of discipline itself, the elucidation and establishment of rigour and control. It then explores the nature of disciplinary 'for practice' education and sets out the extensive range of presumptions which often underlies the relationship between education and practice. Examining the current relationship between disciplinary education and tertiary studies, the paper looks at critical inquiry and disciplinary research, before focusing on competing institutional values and their operational and material consequences. The paper concludes with the example of architectural education's response to the demise of modernism, and at the lessons that might be learned from such educational change. Keywords: design education; design philosophy; ideology; training; disciplinarity Steve Harfield