Debate #9 - Action Points

Debate 9 - Action Points

Focus on schools - Design and Technology statutory component of national curriculum - way of capturing imagination/tacit knowledge. Works esp. well for children from impoverished backgrounds. Action: Design and Technology under threat. Consumes more resources
Design and Technology probably one of worst taught subjects. Maths and reading a structured way of thinking. Design and Technology another way - more inclusive? Prob. the way forward. Project-based learning way to get people to link things together.
Baggage: being prepared to jettison experience and look to imagination
Industry changes, especially procurement. Gulf between what happens in the world and in training. Far more integration needed. Particular role for institutions in this process.
Role of engineering clubs and their capacity to make a difference. Rather than have companies sponsoring initiatives, find out which ones work and put resources into those. Tempting to leave this to the educators. Inspiration can come from anywhere. Design and Technology probably only curriculum subjects that really involves kids in project-based work. Options however can be limited, and can be taught badly.
Modularity and interdisciplinarity two crucial elements. Difficulty in how to move to a position where these become the norms, when you have professional institutions which have such a strangle hold and force people into silos. Where do the cross connections come from?
Engineering clubs at one level do not want to be talking about what we can do for schools, What do we want the educational system to give us at secondary school level. We say to the universities — do these things for us. We ask for things that are too specific. People who feed into the universities better have some skills especially working with their hands. As designers should set ourselves a brief: what are we going to ask the schools to do?
Institutions only bringing only half the people whom are eligible to join. New emphasis of teaching engineering within a business context.
How to broaden the membership - will effect salaries
Career statistics (get figures from Mark afterwards). Assumed education will deliver lots of people to the work place. Not necessarily so. Effect of accreditation on new degrees and risk taking
Institutions and protectionism. Where is the problem? Role of protection of title and function. Good and bad benefits for society.
How to stop people from falling through the gaps. A new layer? And more flexible?
Oxbridge view: do teach interdisciplinarity, have focus on sustainability of design. Significance of teaching management. Context is wrong and what gives? What we should be doing is post-qualification MBAs on interdisciplinary basis and in context of our working practices. Could also be done on a p/t basis. Problem in way research is assessed in architecture. Is harmful to the profession.
Thinking. There is a lack of people who can lead interdisciplinary teams. Where can you place interdisciplinarians within the institution structure?
Encourage ourselves, esp. the young, to do more teaching (and not insist on being paid for it).
Risky thinking is the strand that connects much of the debate. Nothing to stop us from changing the assessment system, especially as we are all ‘designers’. Requires risky thinking.
Design and designers of fundamental importance for tomorrow’s world. Changing order of magnitude. Architectural profession gets it right more often than not. Understand the culture of design better than engineers do. Engineering education often directed at problem solving. Creativity often hammered out of engineers in the education process.
Training designers of tomorrow to be the financiers of tomorrow. Institutions should be working with employers to encourage employees to get out and contribute to industry thinking.
Respect for architects, engineers and clients
How many designers do we want or need. Has an effect on quality

Summary:

Important that making things and project-based work takes place at school. At university, engineering courses defined by institutions. Collapsing in some sectors. Should build on this collapse and open up silo.

Good to agree on some statement of aim at this sort of level. We need to be able to talk in terms of specifics about the content of courses.