No Child Left Behind Is Leaving Designers Behind
We’re six years into the No Child Left Behind education program, which is to say about half of a generation has been taught rote-style in order to pass standardized tests. Children have memorized facts and multiplication tables and the like to the detriment of, well, real learning.
While certainly facts and basic grammar and math are important, so is the ability to put those pieces of information together into something that is more than the sum of its parts, which is exactly what designers do.
We take raw materials and shape them into something new. This is not what American children are learning, and they should be.
Otherwise, we’re going to be left with a generation of people who will be good at being analysts and scientists if they are lucky or low-level service workers if they aren’t.
There won’t be many designers, since the talent we use every day will have been suppressed when they are children. That is, when the ability to nurture and grow those talents is at its peak.
It’s not too late to stop this madness. A more balanced curriculum that returns deductive reasoning and qualitative subjects to American schools can turn this error around.
Dan Saffer is an experience design director for Adaptive Path, an international speaker, and author of Designing for Interaction: Creating Smart Applications and Clever Devices. Derek Van Gieson is an artist, illustrator and fiction writer currently residing in Brooklyn, New York. His work is available for viewing at DerekVanGieson.com.
Remarks 45 total remarks were added before the post was closed.
Colin R. Williams
I am 22 years old and experienced the push toward standardized tests near the very end of high school. There was certainly less room for creativity in school (It was definitely not a requirement).
I found that the best place to express myself was through my writing in English class, and of course through many avenues outside of school.
One shred of light does remain: There are still those incredible teachers who go above and beyond, transcending "teaching to the test" and encouraging young minds to explore.
Martin Polley
This is exactly the point that Sir Ken Robinson made in his brilliant and moving TED talk "Do Schools Kill Creativity?":
Nita
"we’re going to be left with a generation of people who will be good at being analysts and scientists"
Are you saying that rote memorization prepares kids for becoming good scientists? Perhaps there's a bit of a gap in your own education... I understand, of course, that professional snobbery is an essential part of being a designer, but this is ridiculous. Education that doesn't teach kids how to think hurts all creative fields, including design and science.
Jonathan Barrett
@Nita I thought exactly the same thing. The idea that science isn't creative is just ignorant. An "artist" believing that "design" isn't creative is equally offensive.
@Dan I totally agree with your point, but the disdain you show for science is precisely the reason this ridiculous NCLB programme came into being - too many "arty farties" confusing science and mathematics with paint-by-numbers and times-tables due to your own "arty-biased" structureless education.
Friends, we need to reject standardised tests in favour of the promotion of independent thought in *every* field, not just the ones we personally think are important or relevant.
Ryan
You guys are reading into the science comment far to much, people get offended far to easily these days.
Matt McVickar
As the son of two teachers, I can say that this is as frustrating for those within the system as those outside it. The constant and often contradictory demands of faculty, students, and parents are always up against the desire to actually instill in the students that spark that you're talking about. And unfortunately, there aren't too many of those "incredible teachers" that you talk about, Colin -- I think the true state of things is that most, by the end of the day, just want to get their jobs done. The state is breathing down the schools' necks over stupid standardized tests that ultimately end up hijacking the entire curriculum -- I won't say there's no room for fostering thought and creativity when you just want your students to pass the test, but it's certainly making things tight.
Jacob Halton
Just one thought on this (of many):
This could be something else that separates the "normal people" from the "design class" that understands all the things that make design an interesting part of our culture. It seems to me this kind of thinking is just going to create more of a need for dumb graphics. Loud colors, busy cluttered design only meant to grab the attention of people who can't appreciate good design and in turn a beautiful composition and good typography will have no more effect on them than a gradient.
Please see the film "idiocracy" for a clearer picture of what I'm trying to describe.
Jacob Halton
Another thought:
What does this do for the "design mediocrity" class in the hierarchy of designers? Not everyone can be a Paul Rand or a Mies van der Rohe.
Is this going to mean that there's more and more "template makers" and not as many creative thinkers?
I'm tired right now and just wanted to try to spark these topics off of the main subject....what do ya'll think?
Dennis Eusebio
@Jonathan
I think he's trying to say there needs to be a balance, not necessarily a massive free-form school system.
Dan Saffer
I never meant to slam scientists or science. Note I said "if they are lucky," which isn't negative at all. The sciences (and professions grounded in them like engineering and medicine) are more grounded in factual knowledge, combined with some creativity. They will certainly be affected by NCLB as well, but not to the same degree as those for whom the core of their work is emotional, aesthetic, intuitive, and non-scientific thinking.
Ryan
Good at being Scientists? Because science is just about memorising things right?
John Anderson
I'd have to agree with the sentiment about science here.
It takes a great deal of creativity to solve problems and advance a technique as a scientist.
There's a great deal about design that is factual, objective knowledge too - heuristics, color theory, etc. Both professions use different types of creativity!
To say that we'll be left with non-creative scientists is incorrect.
Justin Peters
Dan Saffer wrote: "[The sciences] will certainly be affected by NCLB as well, but not to the same degree as those for whom the core of their work is emotional, aesthetic, intuitive, and non-scientific thinking."
You'd be surprised how important emotional, aesthetic and intuitive thinking are in the sciences. At its heart, scientific thinking is about taking what you've learned to be true and then asking "why?" I don't see how this is fundamentally different from the "non-scientific" thought process of a designer.
Rett
Thanks for the article Dan! It got me thinking about my education and how I ended up in the design field. I can attribute it mostly to my parents and their encouragement to draw and create art. Almost all of my great early memories of making art go back to being at home or away at an art camp. In fact while I loved Art at school, overall I found it to be limiting. To make something of it I had to take the initiative on my own to extend or change projects to interest and challenge myself.
So my thought is that this push for standardization won't really stop people from being creative. If anything it might just weed out people that take art just to fulfill a requirement.
Rob
My school pushed hard toward standardized testing my sophomore year of high school. Fortunately for me, my art teacher was writing her Master's thesis on right brain vs. left brain learning and I was in the experiment group. It was like art class was an oasis in the middle of scantrons and PSATs and PACTs. And thankfully for that, I broke tradition and was one of the first kids from the little hamlet I grew up in to pursue art/design as a career. And thankfully, art was always admired and revered in my family and they encouraged me inside and outside of school to explore my options. “No Child Left Behind” isn't leaving only designers behind; it’s generally leaving education behind.
Dan Saffer
We're dropping down into a rat hole. Feel free to write your own essay about how NCLB is affecting the sciences, or about how science and design are alike. ;)
That being said, scientific thinking is about repeatable, provable, testable results, extrapolated from an established base of knowledge. Design (and art and other "soft" professions) do not always have, or even strive for, repeatable results. Context is too crucial to the problems they wrestle with. I recommend reading Donald Schon's "The Reflective Practitioner" for a more detailed (and much better) examination than I can possibly do here. Some of Schon's ideas germane to this conversation can be found here.
Spencer Cross
Not to get overly broad, but speaking as the partner of a sixth grade teacher I can tell you from personal experience that this is only one of about 50 things that sucks about NCLB.
Also, it's worth noting that plenty of school districts were eliminating arts programs well before NCLB. The cultural shift towards standards and "math and science basics" has its roots in the 80's, when everybody started worrying about competing with Japan, as well as in diminishing school budgets.
Diana
Creativity is directly linked to intelligence. The ability to make connections where there are none is boosted by knowledge and skills in many different areas. That is why Michelangelo and Leonardo Da Vinci displayed their creativity in many areas. Once the general core is established in a child, they will be able to apply that in a much broader sense in any area they decide to be creative about.
Design is visual creativity with a whole lot of practice in being able to apply that creativity. A general education core that is strong will only boost the creative strengths if a child that wants to do design.
Jeff Williams
There are other countries in the world that use standardized testing in schools (Japan comes to mind). It may be an isolated case, but it certainly doesn't seem to have negatively affected the design scene in Japan. If anything, it's the Japanese artists and designers who are influencing the rest of the world.
Andy Jacobson
being a graphic designer and a parent of a 16 year old and 11 year old, i would suggest that regardless of how a child is taught or what they're taught, if they have it in their dna to create, they will, regardless of their education.
what they will lack for a good part of their early years, and perhaps their entire life, is the confidence and security to pursue their dreams.
that is something that is a shared responsibility of the child's family, teachers, and community.
i can assure you it's much easier for a teacher to teach reading, writing, and mathematics, than it is for a parent.
what our society needs is more support for parenting. and then you'll see fields like design flourish.
sixtoe
To spur economies, corporations lobby the government to encourage education in the sciences, technology, and math sectors. That's why schools teach science and math, and kill funding for art.
Complaining does nothing, however. Offer solutions.
Here's one: close your shop for an hour every afternoon and teach a free design class to local kids.
Principles mean nothing until they cost you something.
John Gruyter
"While certainly facts and basic grammar and math are important, so is the ability to put those pieces of information together into something that is more than the sum of its parts, which is exactly what designers do."
This is what -every- professional does, including engineers, doctors, fine artists, policy analysts, creative writers, and skilled tradespeople. Designers need to get over ourselves. Deductive reasoning and qualitative analysis are hardly the sole domain of designers. If Dan Saffer's argumentation is any indication, reasoning and designers are mutually exclusive.
Dan Saffer
I never said this problem was exclusive to designers alone. I agree it does affect them as well. This is, however, a site for writing about issues concerning design and designers.
John Gruyter
Yes, so how is the lack of emphasis on teaching 'creative skills' an issue that concerns design specifically? Dan, please allow me to explain:
It seems to me either (a) design professions have a special need for the skills you listed (which I disagreed with, since the skills as you described them are of general use) or (b) design professions share the same need for those skills as other professions, at which point design shares a general interest in improving education, rather than having a particular claim unto itself.
In other words, to make this a design issue, show me either (a) skills that children aren't being taught which are exclusive to design professions or (b) tell me why designers have a need for those general skills you listed which differs from the needs of other disciplines.
AnkurJ
@ John Gruyter
You make a good point, but it's beyond the scope of this blog. This blog is about design. Thus the articles are written from the perspective of designers, and does not need to address issues for other disciplines.
Clayton Bellmor
Great message and illustration, a very memorable one for me.
It's a shame that art is treated solely as an elective in school systems.
This message also relates to Our Books, Our Shelves by Khoi Vinh.
Like historians say, a nation is measured by how well the people did on tests; Not on the artistic merit.
Clayton Bellmor
Reply to:This is, however, a site for writing about issues concerning design and designers.
Buy "Seventy-Nine Short Essays on Design"
Read "Chapter 1"
Enjoy.
John Gruyter
Re: AnkurJ
I'm not asking anyone to talk about other disciplines, I'm asking why this issue pertains to design specifically. In other words, my critique is the same as yours: how is Dan's point relevant to designers insofar as they are designers, and not to all creatives in general?
So far all the reasons given have nothing to do specifically with design; you might as well say 'Breathing is necessary for design, therefore designers have a particular interest in breathing (even though everyone does it).' That's a premise, but support it! I want some elaboration on why design has a -particular- interest. Dan isn't wrong per se, but he needs to go further to convince me this is a special issue for designers, not just the general creative population.
My questioning is genuine, though it was motivated by frustration. But please, let us keep discussing this; Dan, apologies for my initial brusque tone.
Nola
@ John Gruyter - absolutely agree, all professions create the new from what has come before, not just designers. With science, maybe the second time you do the experiment it is all about repeatable, provable, testable results, but the first time requires a level of imagination, skilled observation and an ability to suspend disbelief rarely encountered outside of stories about magic. Our industry would do well to respect the intense curiosity and problem solving of good science.
That said, NCLB has harmed our children long enough, and teaching to the test produces the kind of dismal cognitive skills I witnessed in a recent trip to an electronics store. Making a purchase with multiple gift cards had the clerk stymied. As I watched in growing fascination, he clicked the same series of keys at least 20 times in a row, despite ample evidence that the proscribed series was ineffective. He was simply unable to assess the problem and solve it on his own, instead placing blind trust in what he had been taught. He's the 'unlucky' service worker Dan mentioned. Service workers are needed, but we should teach them to be competent, in whatever job they hold.
tde
So your premise appears to be that the world would be worse off without designers.
What evidence is there to support that?
Clayton Bellmor
I totally agree with TDE. I mean, really, where's the evidence. On that note, where's the evidence that music makes the world better, or that poetry does, or paintings and on and on.
As the message by Dan clearly states, it isn't necessarily design that is being left behind, but the act of combining information, which is what design is.
Think of it this way, an idiot savant can leave people draw-dropped by how much information they can retain (rainman!) but what are they doing with all that information; repeating it. That's what Dan is stating. That simply remembering information isn't worthwhile, it's about combining thoughts and making connections.
tde
Clayton - there were poets, musicians, and painters 5,000 years ago so I would submit that they are perhaps a bit more central and necessary to the human experience than "designers" are.
Sandra
"As the message by Dan clearly states, it isn't necessarily design that is being left behind, but the act of combining information, which is what design is."
As the message by Dan clearly states, it isn't necessarily X that is being left behind, but Y, which is what X is.
X isn't being left behind, but Y (which is X) is.
Is X being left behind or not?
Ravi Shastri
@ John, tde, Clayton etc...
This is a web site aimed toward and read by designers, thus the topics discussed are written with these people and their interests in mind.
Hence the fact that the writing is all about design and each edition features original illustrations from an artist.
So cease the inadequacy comparisons re: "my profession is as creative as yours!" If your profession was so creative you'd have your own forum specifically discussing how bad the NCLB system is for science or medicine... but the fact that you need to come here to discuss the NCLB issue makes your own point invalid.
As someone who has worked in both science and design, I can attest that whilst great leaps in scientific discovery and learning require creative minds, science itself today stifles this by requiring that current studies only build on existing published articles - not by questioning the very hypotheses upon which prior studies were based.
Which is bad for science and for furthering collective knowledge.
This teaches acceptance and stagnation, not challenging and progressing creatively through newly forged areas of scientific learning.
At least every different field of endeavour can agree that NCLB smells like wee.
John Gruyter
"This is a web site aimed toward and read by designers, thus the topics discussed are written with these people and their interests in mind."
Except there is no mention made of the specific interests of designers, something I addressed earlier.
Furthermore, there are plenty of forums discussing NCLB problems; but no other profession believes itself to be so privileged that NCLB hurts it in a unique, rather than general, way. In other words, this discussion assumes designers have some -special- stake, an unsupported claim.
BTW my profession IS design, thanks, but I am not so solipsistic to think it inevitably has some special status vis-à-vis NCLB problems. This is more of design's trend to self-aggrandizement, as though it were unique in every way simply because it's design! and it's creative!
Give me reasons why designers should care, reasons which are specific to designers (i.e. not shared by other groups). If you can't, then this isn't a design issue at all; it's a more general one.
Ravi Shastri
Arise Sir John the Abstruser!
You are duly knighted for services to willfully and deliberately missing the point.
Furthermore the ability to adopt the tone of an aggrieved victim of a 200 word piece discussing the shortcomings of an entire educational policy - one that you also appear dissatisfied with - displays an ability to misconstrue the issue at a level that even the most media savvy politician would be proud of.
Lastly, let it be known, that the foremost figure in Derek's illustration is definitely giving you the evil eye, and you should totally challenge him to a joust.
Taylor
I'm currently a sophomore in high school. I enjoy photography, music, and painting. I took my school's photography course this year. It was a semester long. For the first quarter, we did nothing related to photography, instead we constructed a wall, drywalled, and the like. During the second quarter when we actually started photography, I was able to take a total of four photographs. I am a member of the school band, but the time we spend actually playing music has been lessened as a result of more writing being added to the curriculum. As for art class, I haven't been able to get into a single class in my two years of high school for all of my absolutely unnecessary albeit required classes happen to fall on the same hour as the art classes.
Jack
My sister is a student in a high performing suburban district and has never once been directly prepped for a state assessment. Narrowing of the curriculum and teaching to the test are simply not required under NCLB and are the result of poor teaching and instruction that has persisted for decades in classrooms across the country. Huge achievement gaps exist because students have never been given the opportunity to learn to high standards. Now that schools and districts are finally being held accountable we are blaming the assessments? Please. Enough finger pointing. The education crisis in this country has never been so apparent.
The unintended consequences you speak of are undeniable, yet high quality intellectual work that requires students to create knowledge through disciplined inquiry to address real-world matters is simply not inconsistent with the demands imposed by state assessments under NCLB.
Dan Boyce
Your observations are accurate to a degree. Being able to pass test does not necessarily exclude creative thought.
My concern would be that parents of this generation do not take an active part in encouraging or allowing their children to be creative / innovative thinkers. The STATE is not the parent, and should not ever be considered a viable substitute.
'1984' may have just been a bit early as a prognostication.
Question authority.
Josh
The article makes no claims that this is a designer-only issue, it is just an article on the topic targeted at designers.
Ralphy
"The article makes no claims that this is a designer-only issue, it is just an article on the topic targeted at designers."
No it isn't. Just because designers are most likely to read it, it has nothing to do with them as designers. You might as well say the copy of USA Today that shows up at the firm is targeted at designers since the issues in it concern designers too.
Doug
A lot of harsh words from people who essentially agree.
Dan, you wrote a great essay and made a great point about creativity versus NCLB that most (all?) here agree with. And I think it fits in quite well with the other essays "about design."
But right in the middle, you tossed in a casual insult to another profession (science). Based on your follow-up responses, I don't think you see it that way, but the vehement reactions in these comments should give you a nudge.
The fields of science and design are more closely related than many people think, and it shouldn't be so surprising to find an overlap in the audience here. But sadly, the general perception of science is as uninformed as the general perception of design.
Thomas
This "more balanced curriculum that returns deductive reasoning and qualitative subjects to American schools" never did exist in most schools. I am from Iowa, which is or was one of the top ten states in quality of public education. My experience with my own education, and today with the education of my son here in New Mexico, is that public education in the United States has never been about science, design, engineering....
With the possible exception of a push in this direction during the "space race", education has always been geared towards farm, factory, and services industries.
Clayton Bellmor
My sister mentioned to me that her high school is having a design competition, I forget the guidelines, and the winner receives a macbook pro.
hey now.
Immortal
I think there is an amazing similarity between scientists and artists/designers, mostly around that moment of epiphany that represents the breakthrough in the process, the revelation, the wonderful excitement of discovery and success. And, the way scientists and artists/designers solve problems is similar, in that they both involve a flexibility and adaptability of thought, and a willingness to question conventional wisdom...to think creatively about options and outcomes.
But, to the point of this essay, our educational system is failing on so many fronts, and the arts is one of the most pronounced of all because of the lingering misperception that artists can never reach the success our society values: material wealth.