Dave wrote: > the medium agnostic philosophy of IxD makes it very > difficult to market to the younger crowd. The "thing" > is well the thing, so having concentrations in IxD > for interactive, for software product, for industrial > design, for architecture (etc.) might be a better > tact
That's why I think interface design is an easier sell than interaction design at the undergraduate level. For better or worse, undergraduate design education is centered around the act of making as a catalyst for learning about design. Those are critical skills, but making artifacts isn't the whole story when it comes to interaction design. I remember a few snippits of conversations while I was at Carnegie Mellon about why there wasn't a bachelors degree in interaction design. Some of it might be a question of maturity (both the discipline and the students). If you could build such a program, would it be a good thing to have 21 year old interaction designers running around? I worked with a few seniors at CMU who would have made great interaction designers, but I think they're the exception. // jeff . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Posted from the new ixda.org http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=30515 ________________________________________________________________ Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)! To post to this list ....... [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help
