The first group of readings I found were very truthful and interesting. Davis' article speaking about the roles colleges and universities play when in relation to students and future graduates was something that really struck me. It had never really occurred to me that liberal studies were all that important in the broad scope of things of to come, and that they were only subjects of interest that we were able to pursue (naive to think, I know).
Davis focuses on the importance of these subjects, and how studying them gives students the ability to be predictive and responsible for the ever-changing careers ahead of them. Without any of this knowledge about design history, art, and other new technologies, a new graduate would not be able to handle the changing field of graphic design -- something that I really believe is true. Having attended college for a few years before coming to OCAD, I noticed their complete lack of liberal studies, or even looking into the future of graphic design. We never looked at any history courses, nothing about the fine arts or history of typography, or even theories on grid structure. Instead, all we would focus on was the practical aspect of graphic design; how to use the programs, how to make designs 'work', and the world of the design in the present -- never looking into the past or the future.
Moving onto Swanson and Leedy's articles afterward, the importance of liberal studies (and methods of research) were shown to me even further. Swanson's article follows in the same footsteps as Davis', talking about the important of liberal studies, and that in a sense, graphic design is in itself a liberal study as well. To Swanson, graphic design as a program at a university, is not something that is completely concrete. Instead, graphic design allows the student to branch out and explore all different facets of art, and various subjects at a time. Liberal studies courses follow this same type of idea, with the subject matter offering students many different outlets for what they've learned, and has the potential to conect many disciplines. Going back on what I said about Davis' article, I agree with this point also. I find that learning graphic design in a university environment allows a lot of freedom of where you would want to take the knowledge; be it digital applications, package design, editorial layouts, etc.
Leedy and Ormrod's article moves on from this importance of liberal studies and art history, and instead moves into the area of actual research and its importance. It talks about the common misconceptions and ideals people get from even hearing the word 'research'. I will admit, before I came to university, whenever I would hear the word I would think of a mad scientist in his lab, or something related to science -- but in actuality, it isn't like that at all. Leedy's article talks about these misconceptions, telling us what research is and isn't. He states that research isn't mere information gathering, or rummaging around for information; but rather it is a process of "collecting, analyzing, and interpreting information / data in order to increase our understanding" of the world around us. After being at OCAD for a few years, I agree with Leedy's article. I think that research is incredibly important, I wouldn't be able to do any designs without it, and I feel that research (along with the study of art and typographical history) is an important topic for all designers to learn.
Articles:
Meredith Davis - The Landscape of Graphic Design Education
Gunnar Swanson - Graphic Design Education as a Liberal Art
Leedy / Omrod - What Is Research?
