Chapter 3: The Call for Transformation

Norman delves into the challenges of designing a new curriculum for the evolving field of design. He discusses his experiences in organizing conferences on design education globally and acknowledges positive examples of curriculum change, such as the reforms at the Faculty of Industrial Design Engineering at Delft University of Technology. The chapter explores the resistance within design departments to update their curricula, focusing on the tension between the traditional craft skills and the need for a broader understanding of technology, business, and human psychology.

He questions the necessity of uniform craft skill requirements for all designers and advocates for a more specialized and modernized curriculum. He points out that many design schools are resistant to change, despite positive responses to his critiques. The author challenges the prevailing mantra of "Do not criticize" during the ideation phase, emphasizing that designers need to apply creative thinking to the design curriculum itself.

The chapter highlights the inadequacy of the current design education system in addressing the multifaceted nature of modern design. Norman argues for the inclusion of courses outside the traditional design realm, such as science, math, and technology, to better prepare students for the complexities of the 21st-century design landscape. He explores the lack of specialization within design education, advocating for more targeted training based on students' areas of interest and the demands of contemporary design practice.

Norman calls for a reevaluation of the role of drawing in design thinking, questioning the necessity of advanced courses in drawing, sketching, and model construction. He argues that the rigid focus on these craft skills limits the time available for teaching essential non-design topics crucial for modern designers. The author challenges design schools to embrace change, overcome defensiveness, and develop a curriculum that meets the diverse needs of students while aligning with the demands of contemporary design practice.

In my essay "Why design education must change,”I ended by stating that as we change, we must be careful not to destroy all that is so wonderful about design. It is only appropriate that I end with the very same words:

"We must not lose the wonderful, delightful components of design. The artistic side of design is critical: to provide objects, interactions and services that delight as well as inform, that are joyful. Designers do need to know more about science and engineering, but without becoming scientists or engineers. We must not lose the special talents of designers to make our lives more pleasurable."