Dave

Great post, thanks -- really interesting perspective!

And as a professor you're actively shaping the market/profession, as well as
responding, as I suppose we all are :)

Susan

On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 2:00 PM, Dave Malouf <[email protected]> wrote:

> Susan,
>
> I don't think this is an all or nothing thing. I am responding to
> this thread and people reflexively condemning these types of job
> descriptions. I used to be one of these people who would stand up on
> the soapbox on challenge the requirement of visual & even prototyping
> skills along side interaction design skills that you listed.
>
> Having dug deep into recent EDU changes this past year I have seen
> students who do amazing work as conceptual and analytical designers
> who also have the skills to visualize and execute their concepts into
> prototypes. Are they doing production code? probably not, but they
> aren't that far off and if I literally went across the street to
> another program at my school they could. And I know that SCAD is not
> alone in having programs of such breadth and depth.
>
> So my message is more of a warning, than it is a proclamation of the
> way it has to be. It is a complication for those of us (yup, me too!)
> who after 17 years of doing conceptual and analytical design have not
> really learned how to master prototyping at truly high fidelity of
> both look and behavior.
>
> if I was to make a prediction for the next 5 years, I would say that
> the breaks are going to exist mostly between researcher, ux
> designer/developers, and then business logic developers. but in many
> cases the researcher and UX designer will be maintained through
> visual and non-production prototyping and then there will be a UI
> developer (using software as he model).
>
> I also don't think this is going to be uniform across all design
> theaters. Some will offer things the way they are now. Others will
> come up with new formulas that fit their needs. The reality is that
> there is no single way to break these down. So much of it is
> contextual.
>
> But what I didn't like in this thread is the de facto condemnation
> and cynicism of this approach that is being attacked.
>
> Hope that helps to clarify.
>
> -- dave
> -- dave
>
>
> . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
> Posted from the new ixda.org
> http://www.ixda.org/discuss?post=49535
>
>
> ________________________________________________________________
> 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
>



-- 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Susan Doran
55 Morning Street
Portland ME 04101
207-774-4963 (land)
202-296-4849 (cell)

/susandoran  (facebook)
@susandoran (twitter)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
________________________________________________________________
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

Reply via email to