This interview originated from the Schools of Thought Conference 3 where I presented on the use of technology in the classroom and how it will change graphic design education. This following exchange happened between myself and the moderator of my panel. Megan and I thought it would be relevant to revisit as she has contributed her own questions to supplement the conversation.

What do you teach?
C: I teach typography, time-based media, visual communications and graphic design history.

What technology to do you use in the classroom during your classes?
C: In the class, I don’t use any particularly special technology. The usual suspects include the erasable whiteboard and digital projector.

What technology to do you use to extend the classroom experience?
C: It’s outside the classroom where technology really helps me deliver content and facilitate community within the classroom. In particular, I use instant messaging, meta-tagging, bookmaking, file sharing, ftp, blogs and remote file storage. Currently, these tools and techniques manifest themselves in programs like adium, aim and bonjour or online communities such as flickr, delicious, feedmelinks and youtube.

Why did you start using these particular tools?
C: I started using these tools out of necessity. I began to realize the ease in which the students were sharing information. I also realized how increasingly frustrated I was getting by using the technology that was available to me a teacher working for a college/institution. I am very familiar with technologies such as blackboard and d2l and how they reflect the best and worst in content delivery. They certainly have the potential to be powerful, but unless the developers begin to acknowledge the lack of intuitiveness and poor design and work to fix the interface, it’s hard to rely on them in the classroom. These online content-delivery systems are not best practice. I am part of a department that teaches students a core of both interactive and print media. Simply put, we need to practice what we preach.

What’s so special about these tools?
C: They are inexpensive (if not free) and the learning curve is short. Most importantly, these tools are peer-to-peer. They don’t need a teacher or moderator to “control” the exchange of information. Rather, the students can interact however or to whoever they wish. Honesty and trust are important aspect of online communities. With someone facilitating the site or community, responses and interest will not be truly genuine: the students might be afraid of retribution.

What exactly are you doing with the tools?
C: I’m an advocate for the sharing of information. I am developing tools that help the students get the information in formats they are comfortable with. I am creating dynamic syllabi and project sites that students can share information. I enable my students to edit my bookmarks while adding their own research to the class content. I am not only sharing isbn numbers so they can buy or check out books, I am sharing online text, bookmarks, videos and images that are relevant to their topics. And most importantly, I am shifting the teacher-student model of learning so the student are more responsible for the content they are learning and in turn, they become more vested in the class.

M: So, it sounds like you rely on new technology more heavily outside the classroom then within. If you rely on these means to “deliver content” and/or “facilitate community,” are your students absolutely required to familiarize themselves with these means in order to “keep-up” or be an active participant in your class? Is it a “necessity?” If so, is it the student’s responsibility to learn how to use these new methods of communication, (if they don’t already) or does it become the instructor’s role to teach these new methods?
C: Outside the classroom, where most of the students work is completed, is an important time for the incubation of ideas and experimentation in form. Students need a sounding board that allows them to seek criticism and validation for their ideas. Online technology allows for such interaction to occur. At CCS, the dedicated students understand this and incorporate it into their process. They also realize that the reality is that there is simply not enough time during class to discover all the answers. The majority of thinking, doing and refining is completed at night and/or weekends. I can encourage interaction by using the tools in class and discuss the power of collaboration, but I certainly can’t force the students to utilize the technology if they don’t care.

Do blogs work for teaching design? Why/why not?
I think blogs are extremely relevant in teaching design. But they are just one form of online communication. As I said earlier, education blogs have a tendency to be a top-down structure. If they are to be used then they must be a safe community that fosters the exchange of ideas regardless of how ridiculous or mundane.

How is it affecting your relationship with your students?
C: As previously stated, this digital approach to teaching makes information delivery efficient and effective. It also allows the some information to be accessible 365 days a year. Without setting boundaries, some students believe that you should be available anytime. For example, I have just recently started to have one hour of office hours a week online. I establish a time and make sure if they want to talk they either send me a link where their images or photographs are located or they send a file directly. This way I can give specific feedback to a project. Otherwise I am talking about an idea that doesn’t exist and that is a waste of time for both parties.

How is it affecting the students’ relationships with each other?
C: This is the most exciting of online tools. Students are growing closer to each other because they depend on communication outside the classroom. Without a shared studio space, interaction is limited. Having surveyed my students online activities and the number of peers they interact with doing homework, I find it very encouraging that students are seeking each other out. And the dialogue outside the classroom is a reality.

Do these tool replace any “face time” with your students?
C: They certainly don’t replace, but they do facilitate the exchange of ideas. I encourage my students to have a dialogue outside of class. Even a simple conversation or quick online crit of a peer’s work will point out obvious strengths or weakness, That criticism, whether good or bad, makes the classroom time more valuable because for example, less time can be spent talking about basic composition problems and more time spent on appropriateness and concept.

Is distance learning viable? Does it really work? What about the quality of this type of education versus the traditional classroom experience?
C: My intention is to use technology to create a peer-driven dialogue. Of course, distance learning has its place and is appropriate for certain kinds of teaching. But for design, the most valuable aspect is the face-to face communication with your student and having an exchange of ideas. Being able to watch how a student reacts to a critique is an important aspect to understanding the psyche of a student. Body language and facial expressions let you truly know how a student is dealing with a problem. Web cameras are a good alternative, but until resolution and bandwidth increase greatly, nothing will replace the intimacy of a face-to-face critique.

M: Do you think students who don’t take advantage of, (or are unfamiliar with) online methods of communication are missing out on a critical part of the design process?
C: Yes, I do. But I do think it’s dependent on the situation. For CCS, our environment is quite transitory. The classroom is the meeting place to present our ideas. But the bulk of the work is completed outside school. Students need a mechanism that allows them to share ideas. If CCS had dedicated workspace then online communication becomes less important. For example, in grad school our communication took place in our studio spaces. Even when others weren’t around we could look at our classmates desks and see what they were looking at and how productive they were. Creative energy became tangible when we were able to see visuals pinned to the desk or taped to the walls. We worked hard and developed a healthy but competitive environment because we didn’t want to be outdone by our peers. Students in grad school who didn’t work in their studios tended to have sub-par work because they were unwilling to share and be an active participant in the creative community. We don’t have the luxury of physical proximity at CCS so a virtual studio must exist. Most students realize that this exists, but whether they decide to engage is up to them.

How have students changed (or not) since you began teaching?
C: Students are always seeking out new technology and they are not afraid of embracing new modes of thought. I don’t think students have changed, I think they have always been adaptable and with the proliferation of technology available at their fingertips, students remind us who the real media savants are.

Do your colleagues use them? Why or why not?
C: Yes. I can’t say all of them, but a good number of my colleagues are willing to try. I think it has to do with time. Just like with any tool, you must learn how to effectively use it. Otherwise, the user is prone to making mistakes. Being unfamiliar with new online tools breeds doubt, but once teachers get beyond the obstacle of learning how the tools work, they realize that good tools can actually speed up the delivery of information. Thus making their job easier.

M: Yes, I’ve had some instructors who encourage these methods of communicating, and several others who prefer more analog methods. In some situations, it would seem that students may have more knowledge or be slightly more “technology savvy” then their instructors. If this is the case, does it become the instructor’s responsibility to “keep up” and learn how to use new technology, so as to not hinder the student’s progression?
C: I don’t think instructors can afford not to learn new methods. That being said, technology is constantly changing and keeping up with software and applications can be daunting, not too mention expensive. But that is the good part about the aforementioned methods, most of these applications are free and easy to use. An effective graphic design studio integrates all forms of media and must be savvy in their use to compete in today’s workplace. The inability to adapt can lead to a complacent classroom. And yes, you are correct, the students consume media and technology at an astonishing rate. Some of the tools I utilize I learned directly from watching my students. They are a great barometer of technological trends and I am constantly asking them for feedback.

M: Do you see any downfalls to student’s excessive use of online communication?
Many students live online and don’t know how to unplug. Others lack the discretion of knowing when being online is appropriate. During presentations or crits, I’ll have students trying to sneak back on their laptop or cell phone to check messages that are not relevant to the class. It becomes a distraction and is disrespectful to their classmates and teachers. I now must stipulate on the class syllabus that cell phones need to be turned off. I also need to instruct students to turn off monitors or close laptops during presentations.
These bad habits are starting to carry over to the workplace. Employers are now starting to stipulate guidelines that applications like instant messenging are not allowed during a typical workday. Work habits are suffering because those who live online, by nature, can digest lots of different information but often are unable to focus for moderate periods of time. Eventually students must realize they need to balance their online consumption with the demands and considerations of everyday life.

I live alone. I grocery shop by myself. I prefer to drive without any passengers, and normally, I do. I have, on occasion, dined companionless, and despite constant warning from both of my parents, I sometimes go on an unaccompanied bike ride, (Though never past dark, and always with a keen eye for suspicious looking vans).

My self-imposed aloneness, has come with a lot of unexpected baggage. When my toilet won’t flush, I’m left unassisted. When I’m stranded on the side of the road with a flat tire, it’s me, myself, and I, (and that weird “x” shaped tire jack thing). Likewise, when my sink is overflowing with dirty dishes I have no one to yell at except for myself. Yes, being solo most of the time is not always easy; but for now, I prefer it.

In design, I am also partial to singleness. I often feel that my best ideas manifest when I’m by myself, in the solitude of my own space. Working alone means that I can set my own schedule, be in complete control along every step of the process, and be held accountable for all outcomes; even the bad ones. Sure, I like to collaborate informally, turning to trustworthy friends for advice or assistance when necessary. But for the most part, I find involuntary or forced collaboration a painful ordeal.

Of course, one cannot hide from group projects forever. In class, we are frequently asked to work in teams, sometimes during certain portions of the design process, or on numerous occasions for the entire duration of the project. Working in partnership, whether with one other person or with an entire group, introduces a whole new level of complexity to any project. Yes, two minds are often better then one, (though I prefer to say “different” then “better”), and usually more can be accomplished when multiple hands are working in succession. But what about the adversity brought forth by collaboration? The uneven distribution of tasks. The myriad of individual ideas. The competing voices. These are some of the less talked about factors of group projects; the ones that live beneath the surface, overshadowed by the wonderment collaboration usually denotes. These are the painful components of group work that go unnoticed until one actually experiences them firsthand.

In the workplace, it would seem that everyone has a well-defined role, based upon their individual strengths, and their obtainment of a particular skill set. Whether or not everyone puts forth the same effort is another story, but these defined roles issue certain responsibilities to certain individuals. Each person is granted ownership over a particular task, an engagement they must complete if the project is to succeed. This is how work gets done.

However, as students, we are all equals. If our projects are left incomplete, we don’t get fired, and we don’t get demoted. Irresponsibility for students effects no one except the student themselves. Yet with group projects, the dynamic is suddenly different. Failure to complete certain tasks effects others on the team. Being negligent or undependable, causes strife amongst the group members. Often times, I feel like collaborative projects are equivalent in nature to multiple headless chickens running in circles around a barnyard. Lucky for the chickens, they’re not under an intense timeline.

At the student level, it’s not enough to force group situations upon us; we must also be taught how to EFFECTIVELY work collaboratively so as to maintain productivity. If students are to ever learn how to trust the collaborative process, it will take more then just experience. We must learn how to assign roles, divide work, and obtain levels of ownership over certain tasks. Then perhaps all of us control freaks will be able to loosen our grips on solitude and uphold confidence within collaboration.