Interview for ScrunchUp Magazine

[David]

This thread is reserved for an interview by Phil Pickering with David and Tom. Please do not post.

Dear David & Tom,

I hope you don’t mind me contacting you like this, but I have approached “ScrunchUp - The Web Magazine for Young Designers and Developers” (http://scrunchup.com/ (http://scrunchup.com/)) with an article proposal about the current state of Web design education provision in the UK, with a heavy focus on your MA Web Design & Content Planning programme.

As I’m sure you are aware, there has been a growing concern over the last few years in the Web design community about the standard of Web design education, especially at the higher education level. Three exciting initiatives (the Opera Web Standards Curriculum (http://www.opera.com/company/education/curriculum/), the WaSP InterAct Curriculum (http://interact.webstandards.org/), and the W3C OWEA Incubator Group (http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/owea/)) have really raised the profile of this topic and there is a growing momentum of support coming from both educators and industry professionals alike.

Unfortunately, there are still too many courses that either offer out-of-date material or skim over the majority of areas which are now vitally important in the building of modern Web sites. And as a result, there are signs of an increasing apathy out there among young web designers and developers regarding higher education.

In an attempt to convince the future generation of web professionals that not all is lost, I thought it would be a good idea to start highlighting some of the few ‘pockets of excellence’ that are available to prospective students in the UK.

Anna Debenham (ScrunchUp) and Andy Budd (Clearleft (http://clearleft.com/)) are both in agreement that your MA is one of the most impressive courses they have seen and definitely worthy of increased exposure.

If you are interested in me conducting an interview with you, which would then form the core of the proposed article, please get back to me as soon as you can regarding your availability and which medium would be most convenient for you. We can conduct the interview via email, via Skype or if your academic timetable allows it, I could come and visit you at Greenwich for a face-to-face chat.

Thanks for taking the time to consider this proposal, and wishing you both continued success in your fantastic work at Greenwich.

Yours,

Phil Pickering

[phil_interact]

Hi David and Tom,

I think it would be a good idea to start off with looking into the background of your course, so it gives a general introduction to the work you're doing at Greenwich. As such, could you give us a little introduction as to how the course came about... like, where the idea came from, and why you felt it was worth setting up.

Thanks,

Phil

[David]

The programme is 10 years old this year. It was designed, written and validated in 2000 although the first student cohort didn't arrive until 2003 - they were part-time students and our first MAs were awarded in December 2005. Tom was the prime mover, he did all the hard work of writing the programme and getting all the administration organised. As I recall, I just advised on some of the content but Tom may have a clearer memory.

There were 2 main principles behind the design of the programme:

1) All the existing web design courses we knew of were taught in schools of computer science or graphic design and we felt that these two approaches were each at the extreme ends of the spectrum of skills required by web designers. We felt that web design was actually a new discipline and not an extension of something else. So, we set about building a web design programme from scratch and without any preconceived ideas. It helped that neither of us is a graphic designer or computer scientist.

2) Both Tom and I have design backgrounds in the built environment and we felt we had a good framework on which to build a new programme in web design. The programme was originally called "Website Architecture" and this reflected our approach. We thought (and still think) that web designers are analogous to architects and design websites much as architects design buildings. Just as architects work with engineers and specialist designers to complete their buildings, so web designers work with programmers and other specialists to complete websites. So web designers need to know a great deal about their own role but they also need a good understanding of what the other professionals do and how they work. Communication with and an understanding of other disciplines is vital to the success of any project.

So those were our two guiding principles - Tom will correct me if I've missed anything. We still consider that our programme turns students into website architects but it became necessary to change the title because it caused some confusion.

Essentially, we saw a gap in the market. We didn't think that anyone else was teaching web design properly and so we set out to do it ourselves.

[phil_interact]

There seems to be the tendency in many traditional computer science departments to not treat HTML/CSS/DOM Scripting as serious endeavours and hence not worthy of much attention. They seem much happier with promoting Java as the main web development language... a choice which doesn’t really reflect current industry practice. Similarly, graphic design-based courses tend to go for Flash (or even Director in some cases) and again, this seems to go very much against what the web design industry is looking for in new graduates.

Being born out of the School of Architecture, do you think it was much easier for you to dictate the course content? Do you feel you were fortunate not to be shackled by trying to shoehorn a web design course into an existing programme of offerings from either a computer science or graphic design department?

Phil

[David]

There seems to be the tendency in many traditional computer science departments to not treat HTML/CSS/DOM Scripting as serious endeavours and hence not worthy of much attention. They seem much happier with promoting Java as the main web development language... a choice which doesn’t really reflect current industry practice. Similarly, graphic design-based courses tend to go for Flash (or even Director in some cases) and again, this seems to go very much against what the web design industry is looking for in new graduates.
Yes, that's very true.

Being born out of the School of Architecture, do you think it was much easier for you to dictate the course content? Do you feel you were fortunate not to be shackled by trying to shoehorn a web design course into an existing programme of offerings from either a computer science or graphic design department?
Yes, we had a free hand in the design of the curriculum as there was no history of digital media teaching in the School (although my background is in Computer Aided Design). Subsequently, the School has developed BA programmes in graphic design and 3D digital design but the web design MA predates them.
The only real problem we had was in convincing the School of Computing and Mathematical Sciences that we should be allowed to run a programme in web design. They pretty much felt that the Web was their area of expertise.

[phil_interact]

One of the key difficulties that has been identifed by web design educators is trying to satisfy both the goals of students who see themselves as “developers” and those students who see themselves as “designers”. The very general entry requirement of your course must mean that you get students from a wide variety of academic and professional backgrounds. I guess it would be rare for you to have a years cohort made up of purely “developers” or purely “designers”. Do you think that helps break down any preconceptions that students might have when studying web design and development? Do they quickly realise that modern web professionals need to have, at the very least, some basic skills in both areas?

[David]

Most of our students are neither developers nor designers. They tend to come from non-related disciplines like teaching, marketing, PR etc. As such, they are more willing to accept our approach to the subject. We have had students with some web design/development experience, they are often the most resistant to our approach but are always won over in the end.

It's very healthy to have a student cohort with such a wide range of skills and experience. These days, the Web touches almost everything and students can learn a lot from each other.

One can't spend any time thinking about web design without realising that it is a very broadly based subject area. A good web designer must occupy the middle ground between development and design, mastering specific areas like the correct use of markup, accessibility, usability and findability and championing "user-centred design" - areas where developers and visual designers may feel uncomfortable. But web designers must also have a good understanding of web development and graphic design.

I think the key issue for "developers" and "designers" is that web design is not an extension of what they already know, it's a completely separate area of expertise which may have some overlap. Web design and web development are as different as architecture and engineering. Engineers do not consider themselves to be architects.

[phil_interact]

Probably the biggest criticism out there of the majority of web design courses, and higher education in general in many cases, is that they are not relevant to current industry needs. How do you approach this issue of keeping the content of your course up-to-date? What advice would you give to other educators who might be getting concerned that their courses are falling behind?

[David]

The content of our programme is constantly evolving to reflect current ideas in the industry. A traditional approach to content design, where course details are updated every few years (in some cases 5 years!) doesn't really work in this case - things are moving too fast. As teachers, we have to react to what's happening now, make students aware of changing ideas and discuss them. This year, we've covered some CSS3 and HTML 5 issues and the emerging principle of "progressive enhancement". Those sort of things can't wait to be written into next year's content.

We are very fortunate that good web designers are eager to share their ideas with others. There are literally 100's of blogs and magazines with really good, up-to-date content out there. From the start of the programme, students are expected to be "independent learners" and to go out and find the information they need online and in our constantly updated reading lists. As there is too much information for any one individual to cover, we encourage students to work as a team in their research efforts and to report back any useful information using the forum.

My advice to other educators is that they should expect to be learning along with their students. The old teacher/pupil model doesn't really apply here, it has to be a team effort between staff and students with staff taking the role of facilitator rather than traditional teacher. The subject area is moving so quickly that educators can't wait until they are sure of their ground before passing it on because by that time, it's already too late.

[phil_interact]

This question of constantly evolving courses is a very important one - there is a commonly-held belief in the web design industry that academic institutions are slow to change. Obviously there is the non-inconsequential matter of designing and writing course materials, but do you think that higher education as an institution suffers from inflexibility due to the current validation process?

I think it would be very helpful to both sides, if you could briefly give a quick overview of the validation process, especially how long it usually takes and to what extent can a course be updated without having to be re-validated. Also, is there any difference in the validation process for a postgraduate degree such as yours, than the process for a typical undergraduate degree?

[David]

...do you think that higher education as an institution suffers from inflexibility due to the current validation process?

I don't think so. Obviously, I can't speak for all universities but it seems to me that it is perfectly possible to have a course or programme validated without being absolutely specific about everything that's taught. Of course we have to identify broad topic areas and indicate how they are taught but this can easily be done by referring to "teaching outcomes" rather than subject taught. This allows us to specify a teaching outcome such as "students will develop a good understanding of modern markup techniques" without specifying whether we will use XHTML 1.0 or that we may discuss HTML 5. This gives us the flexibility to change the actual content if we feel that is necessary but retain the objective, the learning outcome. This enables us to have the programme re-validated every 5 years and evolve the actual content whenever necessary.


I think it would be very helpful to both sides, if you could briefly give a quick overview of the validation process, especially how long it usually takes and to what extent can a course be updated without having to be re-validated. Also, is there any difference in the validation process for a postgraduate degree such as yours, than the process for a typical undergraduate degree?

It typically takes around 12 months to write a new programme and have it validated. In adition to just sitting down and writing it, there's a deal of university administration to be done - although this is a chore, it is important. The programme content, design and mode of delivery are scritinised by a panel of academics, administrators and subject experts from inside and outside of the university.

Once a programme is validated, it must be re-validated every 5 years. We recently had our re-validation event with Craig Grannell as our external expert.

In addition to this process, any intermediate course changes have to be validated but we have found that it is much better to design flexibility into course designs in order to avoid constant re-validations. It's perfectly possible to do this providing the course framework is robust and the whole programme is designed with the evolution of content in mind.

There is no difference between the validation of undergraduate and postgraduate degrees. They are both rigorous affairs.

[Tom]

University of Greenwich programmes are fully reviewed by panels of combined internal and external validators every five years. In between these major reviews we can and do make minor course changes in response to comments by staff, students and external examiners.

[Tom]

Some of the differences between the UoG programme and many other web programmes are identified in the following points:
1) like building architects, our aim is always to keep a balance between website functions and technical/asethetic/business objectives. See http://www.websitearchitecture.co.uk/our-philosophy/
2) we are interested in the entrepreneur's approach to web content management, as well as in the approach of the professional designer who is hired by an existing organization - in much the same spirit as they hire graphic designers to produce company reports
3) we were really pleased to hear someone say that 'The great thing about this course is that the final project is a fully functioning website, for your own business or for your employer's business. This is so much better than all the university courses my friends are doing which result either a thesis which no one but the examiners ever reads or a design which only the examiners ever see’.
4) in the first year our MA was running one of the students had a business idea, designed a website, obtained the web content and by the end of the programme had earned enough money from the website to pay his university tuition fees. Since then, his website has gone from strength to strength. This was a good educational experience in itself but if you are going to work as a professional web designer then it is a great thing to have on your CV and to discuss with potential clients.
5) the UK is full of people drinking too much coffee in bedrooms (and converted garages and shared workspaces) who are dreaming of setting up web businesses without the benefit of (1) a design theory (2) a structured design process (3) other people – staff and students - with whom to debate the commercial, aesthetic, technical and content management issues in web publishing. The results of their mis-directed efforts are (1) many ghastly websites with flaky technology and crackpot business ideas (2) a high failure rate and many disappointments.
There are also far too many people working on content management for large and small organizations who have an unbalanced grasp of web issues. It is like having an architect who can do artists' perspectives but knows little about structural engineering or the needs of building users. Or it is like having a building put up by a structural engineer who knows about stresses and strains and concrete reinforcement, but has no grasp either of aesthetics or of the needs and aspirations of building users.
My belief is that web design is far more often very bad than very good - and that the solution is to place web education alongside other design disciplines in a design school. Web design must grow into a fully fledged design discipline – learning as much as it can from the older design disciplines. We can begin to glimpse a future in which web design and content management will become strong professions which play a leading role in the artistic, editorial and commercial circles.

[phil_interact]

Wow! Great answers so far guys... :)

Just a couple more quick questions for you, to finish off:

1. What do you think the web design industry could do more of to help educators in planning and delivering their courses?

2. What advice would you give to a 16 to 18 year-old who is interested in pursuing a career in web design?

[David]

1. I think the single most useful thing the industry could do is to find some way to give accreditation to courses/programmes that they felt were deserving of it. This would give a seal of approval that students could look for. It would also have the effect of improving standards across the board as most institutions would want to conform in order to attract students.

Both education and industry need to make stronger links - I admit it's not something I've been good at. The lack of money in education often means that we can't attract guest speakers but if industry movers thought of involvement with education as being an investment, I'm sure it would pay off. We've already had a great offer from Andy Budd.

2. That's a really tricky one because I don't see an obvious pathway at the moment.

When we first proposed our MA in web design, many people didn't take us seriously, questioning whether is was a suitable subject area for an advanced degree and whether there was enough content to fill a whole programme. I guess the same attitude is common in other higher education institutions because I don't see many degrees in pure web design, despite the fact that there is more than enough content to make them viable.

My best advice would be to gain a degree in a related (or even not related) area of design and then come to Greenwich for our MA.

Tom and I are currently planning for a wholly online version of the programme which we hope will be available from September 2011.

[Tom]

Q1. It is mutually beneficial if practitioners give a little of their time to education by attending design crits so that (a) the students benefit from their wisdom, experience and knowledge (b) practitioners can learn from answering questions and putting ideas and principles into words. Fresh questions lead to a fresh lines if thought - especially of one has difficulty phrasing a good answer to the question. I have often heard the remark that 'someone asked me xxx and I started thinking yyy'. So people working in the industry could do a lot for students and a lot for themselves by giving a little time to teaching. We would certainly like to hear from any such people! They could come as guest critics or they could, perhaps, offer a day of intensive teaching. How about this: we could arrange a room, the students would attend for free, outsiders would pay to attend and most of the money could go to the lecturer.

Q2. I agree with David that there is no obvious route for a school leaver and a degree in related subject could be considered. My general view across many subject areas is that a strong design education involves 3 years undergrad + 1 year postgrad. Taking programmes in our school as examples, a BA in Graphic and Digital Design would be useful but a BA in 3D Digital Design and Animation would be better because it involves both visual design and programming skills (taught by our computer school). Degrees in Fine Art or Architecture would also provide a design foundation with a wide range of skills in computer assisted design software. Looking outside our school, I would say: look for a programme which involves computers and mainstream design. A fairly narrow band of school leavers have natural aptitudes for art, maths and technology. The web industry needs to attract its fair share of these people.

[Tom]

We discussed this year's 'work in progress' websites yesterday and it was a pleasure to hear such remarks as 'Hey guys - my site was only published two weeks ago and I'm coming second on Google for my primary keywords', to which the response was 'Huh: I'm top for mine'. Competition is healthy, in education, in life and in the web industry.

[Tom]

One of my reasons for favouring a MA-level course in web design is the need for good debate an exploratory attitude to design. Since postgraduates come from many disciplines they are much better suited to this than undergraduates with 3 years of shared educational experiences. Here is part of an email I received today. It comes from a completely different design discipline but similar comments apply to most fields of design:
"Those with energy, humility and the willingness to pursue their interests
simply float to the top. Those that accept their education is never
complete and who proactively seek critical inquiry in everything they do
become better landscape architects in time. Those who feel some false sense
of superiority because of the school they went to inevitably will be
replaced by someone hungrier (and cheaper).

In all my travels I have never met a landscape architect who I feel was 100%
competent in every aspect of Landscape Architecture. Some people love doing
Design, some Design Management, some love doing grading and construction
detailing, some love Project Management or Financial Management. I doubt
there is anyone who loves and excels at all of these.

I only came to this realization while working with a 65+ year old (brilliant
and cantankerous) landscape architect over the last few years. As far as I
could tell, he knew everything there is to know about the field - there was
no problem he couldn't easily deal with. Nonetheless he never let a day go
by without finding out about a new process, product, method or place. Over
time I came to realize that his only shortcoming was the things that he was
not interested in doing."