A Shared Responsibility
For two consecutive years, the Interior Design Educators Council (IDEC) has voted not to unify with a professional association comprised mainly of design practitioners. Individually, however, large numbers of their members have joined. This schizophrenia seems to parallel existing philosophies within interior design education itself. The traditionalist and the progressive, in interior design as in all other areas of life, are going in opposite directions.
Interior design programs are housed in schools of architecture, human ecology, fine arts, home economics--there is the possibility of an interior design program within a multitude of varying "schools." Each of these programs adopts a "viewpoint" and a strength based upon available resources. Debate rages within the design community about the appropriateness of programs that operate in isolation from architectural influences or business school curricula. The question has been raised whether a program isolated in fine arts or human ecology adequately prepares a student for employment in today's market. What keeps education from evolving concurrent and in harmony with practice?
The Issue of Funding
It is no secret that the world is changing at a frantic pace. Technology immediately brings every cultural and historic event into our living rooms and on our desktops; shifts in personal and corporate values are redirecting financial allocations. Across the board, funding for all disciplines is being reduced. Universities and colleges that formerly obtained 40 to 60 percent of their financial support from state government now receive 20 to 28 percent. Private schools must compete in the marketplace for students, and are spending significant sums to update their facilities and broaden curricula to include course offerings. Faced with financial constraints, class sizes have increased. The lab of 16 students, or the class of 50, are practices of the past. There are more students, but less money for instructors. Family funding of education has become increasingly difficult as disposable income dwindles.
Alumni are a traditional source of money for education, however designers are not usually significant contributors when considered in the context of a university budget. Designers rarely donate buildings or create fellowships for advanced studies in interior design.
Research funding is an extremely valuable source of revenue to colleges and universities. There is a direct correlation between the monies likely to be generated by the findings of research, such as a new wonder drug for which the public would pay millions, and the dollar amount invested in discovery or development. It seems unlikely in today's financial climate that purely aesthetic elements of design will find significant research funding. It is reality that in education and in practice an increased demand exists for technology and pragmatism.
The Question of Profit
In the practice of design, firms vary as dramatically as do the programs. Some firms are known for their fine aesthetic design, others for their practical programming. Each develops a clientele based upon these clients' varied needs and the designer's perceived value. What, then, constitutes a "quality" design education? What must one know to effectively and profitably practice interior design?
Progressive design firms are looking for new perspectives and bodies of knowledge to meet the changing needs of their clients. Whether new graduates or seasoned veterans, design firms are hiring employees who contribute to the revenues of the firm immediately. The expense of carrying a new employee through two or more years of learning is a luxury many firms cannot afford. The new employee must be able to enrich the firm's potential for creating a unique market advantage on day one of employment. That advantage, marketable in today's economy, might be strength in environmental evaluation of projects, advanced programming or work process concepts, awareness of financing or tax advantages that enable clients to reduce the overall costs of projects, or superior post occupancy evaluation skills--anything that will contribute to the bottom line and set a firm apart competitively. MBAs and environmentalists now are filling slots formerly occupied by designers. The interior design student and the practitioner need to expand their horizons to become and remain valuable resources.
These diverse needs suggest undergraduate design education is falling short of the mark. The skills and processes being taught in design programs often are found inadequate by employing designers. Many believe it is the isolation of the teaching profession from the day-to-day practice of design. While students learn design theory, they are unaware of appropriate business concepts needed to interact effectively with clients. Others see students and entry level designers jumping too quickly to design solutions, exploring too few diverse options. What some decry as a blue sky approach to design others see as open minded problem solving. Interior design is based on problem solving; the process of gathering, comprehending and evaluating data demands highly developed critical thinking skills not being taught today.
The Need for Learning Opportunities
The hierarchy of teaching also is under attack. The system that provides the permanence of tenure without a method of reward to encourage excellence and continued forward momentum for the educators is flawed. What is the appropriate balance between security, ambition, and response to market forces?
There is increasing need for interior design graduate programs. Designers must keep pace with clients and with the competition. The supporting body of interior design knowledge is expanding, and advanced education is necessary to develop practitioners able to keep pace. The segmentation of the practice into specialty areas such as hospitality, health care, commercial, residential, government and retail brings the opportunity for in-depth understanding of the respective complexities.
A critical and urgent need exists for a functional, dynamic internship program for students of interior design. In Tennessee the law requires implementation of a structured internship by the year 1997. There is none in place. How many practitioners are aware of appropriate learning opportunities for interns, and how many have begun the planning process to involve these activities in their firms? Some have met the challenge; most have not.
The need and opportunity for learning are ubiquitous throughout the course of a design career. Learning can occur in both formal and informal situations. We learn from books, travel, movies, the voices of workers on design projects, the housekeeper in the hotel who will live with the design product. We learn through discussions with peers and mentors, through controversy and agreement. Design firms have become, in the parlance of industry, learning organizations. Many successful firms have structured career advancement paths demanding preparation and successful completion of the NCIDQ exam, requisite continuing education courses and mandatory extracurricular activities. Interior design licensing frequently requires continuing education; The American Institute of Architects (AIA) and the International Interior Design Association (IIDA) require continuing learning for maintenance of professional standing. Both associations also have minimum education requirements for practitioner membership. The minimum standards are established by the profession, recognized in industry and mandatory for individual success. This level of commitment needs to reach into undergraduate education as well.
Practice and education must come closer together. A competitive economy demands strengthened interior design education, appropriate internship activities and lifelong learning. There should be exchanges of information between practitioners and educators achieved in a mutually supportive and cooperative environment. Something as simple as working one day a month in the other's environment would greatly improve communications, and perhaps contribute to greater understanding and less empty criticism. Designers and their firms must actively support higher education, and pay appropriate wages when hiring designers with advanced degrees. Just as the client's bottom line must be respected, so must the commitment of time and money expended by the student and designer who advance themselves and the profession through continued education.
If design is to continue its rise in professional stature it must be based on excellent performance, not marketing. Only with a cohesive effort between educators and practitioners can the potential of interior design be achieved. Only with shared vision to set educational goals, shared commitment and responsibility to achieve the goals and a focus on this priority can interior design rise to the challenges of the next decade.
User Comments:
No comments added
Add your comment
Fill out the fields below:
|
