Beopen+ed

The strength of animation holds up when brought to the test of corporate training. It helps break down complex concepts into digestible content pieces and keeps learners engaged while making sure that the information is absorbed fully. Compared to videos with a “talking head,” which looks like a sci-fi villain, or plain slides with black text on a white background, animation can do wonders. And last but not least, don’t think animation is unfitting for a professional environment because it will certainly boost your audience’s learning and productivity.

Before going into more detail on animation’s benefits, we should clarify the conditions of a successful training session. The end goal is for employees to learn to train themselves and get actively involved in something new and more challenging. That leads to two key elements that a corporate training session needs: knowledge and motivation.

Animations Can Help Boost Engagement and Motivation:

Creates A New Learning Atmosphere

One big strength of animation is that it makes way for storytelling, a powerful tool for triggering emotions. Storytelling can make the content much more relatable and interesting to learn than a PowerPoint slideshow with dull bullet points. It’s simply a “dressing” to make the information more digestible, but you have to be careful. Understand your audience first and utilize what makes them tick. Success in this aspect will make employees much more willing to learn just because they’re interested in your training session.

Shortens Learning Time

Employees are busy and stressed enough without training sessions, so they probably don’t have much mental strength to spare for them. Animations succeed in doing them a favor by saving their time by making the content compact and easy to memorize. Shorter learning time conveniently fits our shorter attention span, meaning more engagement, and employees don’t have to constantly ask themselves, “How long is this going to take?”

Not only employees benefit from animation-based training, but the company does as well. Less time spent on training means less money spent, and companies can use this money on more practical matters.

Choosing The Right Animation Type in Corporate Training

Animations are super diverse, but don’t worry, making choices won’t be too difficult. In essence, animation comes down to 3 types that are most commonly used: whiteboard animation, 2D/motion graphics, and 3D animation.

Whiteboard Animation

Whiteboard animation is the combination of hand-drawn elements on a white background and a timely voiceover. Some videos feature a hand quickly drawing on the whiteboard to add a sense of live action.

This style of animation is particularly popular, and you can easily find examples of it after a few minutes of browsing YouTube. Audiences love to watch whiteboard videos because they are clean and academic looking, making it suitable for multiple purposes. It’s also the most digestible of all as it contains no distractions. Here is a typical example of a whiteboard MOA (Mechanism of Action) animation.

An MOA animation is one that typically explains the working of a drug or processes in your body that take place on a microscopic level. It perfectly wraps up the information into a bite-sized lesson, while also being budget-friendly and visually pleasing.

2D Animation/Motion Graphics

This is essentially a glow-up version of whiteboard animation. For this style, animators add in 2D characters or motion graphics to spice things up. It’s more colorful than whiteboard animation and usually presented as a story. Here is a typical demonstration of a 2D animation.

The animation is from a Permaculture Design online course that specializes in knowledge and practical solutions to develop sustainable ecosystems. If you watch it, you will notice a lot of motions and movements bringing the images to life, and this is a strong suit for 2D animation, something whiteboard animation cannot do.

3D Animation

This is a very popular choice in the medical field, but not favored by corporations because they are costly and unnecessary. 3D animation is usually used to depict extremely difficult concepts that are invisible to our naked eyes, thus the common use in medicine. 3D animation is extremely good for depicting real processes and phenomena, as well as storytelling. This will bring new life to corporate training, provided that you have resources to spare. That said, here’s a perfect example of 3D animation.

And that is all about animation-based corporate training. Considering the benefits it brings, there’s no reason why you shouldn’t deploy this magnificent piece of technology. And if you’re interested, start by choosing the right animation for your company. There is no particular rule identifying what types of animation you should use in corporate training. We hope our introduction to animation types can give you an overall look at the advantages each type brings and how to apply these benefits. Moreover, you can definitely combine several styles at the same time to make the most out of them.

The crisis brought about by the COVID-19 has forced education – just like many other aspects of social and economic life  – to shift online. This makes educators wonder if a practical subject like art can be taught online at all. Though particular challenges posed by the shift vary widely across disciplines and institutions, the question provides much food for reflection on the fundamentals of how art is taught.

Unlike, text-based subjects, teaching practical art courses online has always been a challenge for both teacher and student. In her recent article Teaching Art Online Under COVID-19 artist and educator Kaitlin Pomerantz has even compared teaching art online to teaching people in a land-locked town to swim without a swimming pool. She points it out that during the period of art school closings caused by the pandemic, educators faced the challenge of trying to “figure out how they could switch their materials, tools, and techniques-dependent, in-person, community-reliant, hands-on teaching of studio-based art to virtual platforms.”

The problems outlined by Pomerantz are echoed by many educators across art institutions. One of the challenges that first come to mind in relation with teaching art by distance learning is unavailability of physical resources—studios, kilns, editing software, darkrooms, woodshops, and peers— which in the online realm are replaced with on-screen communication. While certain screen-based mediums only need the technology to work perfectly, which is not always the case in remote rural areas, there is a fundamental problem concerning spatial mediums like sculpture that need comprehensive video instructions as well as a well-equipped studio, also not so often found in every home. For these mediums, a question arises of what remains of art-making when the institutional resources are not accessible. Is that possible to keep the studio practice standards high?

The same can be said about teaching materials and instructions. The ones previously used in the classroom appear not to be so simple to adapt for online teaching. Delivering practical activities online requires a radical rethinking of lesson content.

Another obvious disadvantage to working online is the lack of face-to-face contact between tutors and students, and further, the loss of the interaction between peers that forms a vital part of any classroom-based experience. Design critiques that generally provide art education with a structured means for intensifying the learning process may have certain detriments too, when performed online. According to Brad Hokanson, professor in Graphic Design at the University of Minnesota and author of papers on design critiques, online crits provide less opportunity for the informal, spur-of-the moment critique. The difficulty with text-mediated online critique, he explains, is that while written comments are recorded for later use, they take significantly more time to review and process by the critic, while online time and involvement is all defined, conscious, metered, and, hence, limited.

However, there are still media, such as synchronous video conference software or shared desktops that quite closely replicate the direct connection of the in-person design crit.  As explained by Hokanson, the key thing in this case is to replicate the fluidity of conversation inherent to face-to-face art education, as it adds much to a critique, even if done through sharing screens and talking synchronously. Speaking of hands-on media, he gives an example of online music lessons connecting a violin player in Japan with an instructor in Finland. Asynchronous critique may be less effective as it cannot ensure the same interaction as an in-class conversation, but it can still provide direction and formative assessment through mark-up and annotation.

Authenticity issue is yet another common criticism of any form of distance learning. On top of that, there are numerous pain points connected with validity of online assessments and cheat prevention in art education.

All these issues that remain to be resolved make many higher education professionals believe that art and design education with its visually or interactionally intensive pedagogical models such as the studio model is impossible to do effectively online. However, there are some successful examples that demonstrate how art education can effectively exist in the online realm.

Many potential disadvantages are outweighed by the advantages. Accessibility is certainly one of these. From the very beginning, distance learning’s target student groups include those in rural communities, those with irregular patterns of employment, single and working parents, and adult returnees to education and careers. Often, these students are frustrated by the lack of viable alternatives to attendance-based courses and feel isolated and excluded by their circumstances.

In his article Can You Teach Art Online? Kyle Dancewicz, Director of Exhibitions and Programs at SculptureCenter, New York, describes the strategy used by Constantina Zavitsanos, who teaches art at the New School. Her approach underscores the common paradigm of equating physically showing up in the classroom with learning.  According to Dancewicz, Zavitsanos has always allowed students to attend class using Zoom, an option often necessary for those who cannot attend in person because they are disabled or sick, or because the work they create is best presented outside of traditional classroom critique. In addition, Zavitsanos sometimes offers instruction via Zoom or accepts students’ prerecorded performances for group critique. This access-driven approach elevates distance learning from its perceived status of a disruption to the norm, while also opening deeper questions about the presumed defaults of art-making as a whole: When a student has a reason not to use the physical classroom to display their work, it reveals the physical and conceptual limits the classroom imposes.

Modern students often seek the same degree of flexibility they are accustomed to in other spheres of life. “Like it or not, we live in an age where consumers want what they want, when they want it; that’s why we have the 24-hour supermarket and the all-night garage,” says Michael Stewart, founder director at Interactive Design Institute, UK.

With their Studio Art School that is the only institution in the UK approved to offer the Level 3 Diploma in Art and Design by distance learning, everything is online. Each student is given access to their personal online studio where they can download learning materials and communicate with their tutors at any time, by simply logging on. Lessons are presented as a series of step-by-step demonstrations that  do not require specialized software or bandwidth.

Stewart recalls that the criticism he and his colleagues faced when they first suggested delivering practical art and design courses online came from two distinct fronts: the “technically, it can’t be done” crowd, and the “aesthetically, it shouldn’t be done” crowd. “Each side seemed determined to believe I was claiming e-learning to be superior to classroom learning; I never have and never will,” he explains.

Recognizing the limitations of teaching art online, Stewart provides a number of arguments for the model. While lacking the amount of peer-to-peer communication that class-based education has to offer, the online studio can give students as much time as is necessary letting them proceed at a pace which is best suited to each of them. The advantages also include the fact that online art students do not have to compete against their peers for tutor attention, or endure the distractions that can sometimes be part of the group experience.

All conversations with tutors, including advice, guidance, and comments on works-in-progress, are recorded and stored for future reference within the student’s personal studio area, providing both student and tutor with a complete history of their interaction. Similarly, with the use of the stored images, specific points in the creation of the student work can be referred to at each stage. Unlike traditional forms of learning in the visual arts, where once completed, the piece of work only exists in its final manifestation, within the online studio, the piece exists as an ongoing process, recorded at every stage of its development. At the same time, this method provides little opportunity for cheating. Not only dozens of images for each piece are stored in the system documenting all stages of the process, but also sketchbook notes and other supportive materials can be requested at any time.

As Studio Art School team is aware that many students may not have access to dedicated studio facilities, specialized equipment or unlimited budget for materials, all demonstrations are conducted and photographed on a standard kitchen table.

Some institutions attempt at re-creating the studio-based model in online design education courses. One of them is Minneapolis College of Art and Design, USA, with its Distance Learning Initiative, intended to appeal to a diverse audience – degree seeking students, high school students interested in attending art school, arts professionals, arts educators, and other life-long learners. The program maintains the role of the instructor in the studio model using well-formed, guided, direct questions and instructions and features online sketchbooks and portfolios providing a complete documentation of students’ work throughout a course, as well as visual examples of past student work that are used to set standards for work level expectations. The online format also allows bringing in guest artists from remote locations to some of its online courses whom students otherwise could not access. The team admits that the program is still small and evolving – e.g. online design critique still remains a “special challenge”.

The existing examples prove that in certain circumstances e-learning could be as effective as classroom-based teaching. It would be irrational to deny that  there is quite a number of challenges related to delivering practical art and design courses online – rewriting syllabi, redesigning courses and teaching materials, reinventing assessment and critique approaches, and learning new technologies, just to name a few. Still, the COVID-19 crisis has demonstrated that shift in this direction from traditional classroom-based education should not be perceived as a departure from normal, but quite on the contrary, as a way to expand the kinds of places where art school happens and where art is made.

Sad but true: Design is dominated by white, able-bodied men. Reports on the design economy demographics make for rather depressing reading in this regard. The analysis reveals that the industry is mostly white, male and from “more advantaged groups”. A whole list of challenges – from inaccessible mentoring schemes for graduates to 20% gender pay gap – results in the fact that even in such economies as the UK, where design is thriving, the profession is 78% male and 87% white. The research finds that women are less likely than men to be in senior roles; while 88% of design managers are white, compared to 7% from an Asian background, 2% from Black, Asian and ethnic minorities, and 3% from other ethnic groups.

The design industry is lacking diversity and it is obvious that one of the biggest reasons to that is education with its high tuitions, unbalanced curriculum focusing mainly on Western design tradition and “mostly white, mostly male” staff. Notwithstanding the fact that creative arts and design are often thought as disciplines of expression and liberal thinking, it appears that it is the pedagogies themselves that are contributing to a crisis of diversity, leaving women and Black, Asian and ethnic minority students feeling excluded of the practice.

There are many areas of art and design pedagogical practice in which inclusivity, equality and diversity can be enhanced. Education systems rarely connect with students outside of the Eurocentric narrative. In the academic year 2018/2019, 108,965 white students were enrolled in creative arts and design-related undergraduate degrees, compared with just 5,855 and 5,155 from Black and Asian backgrounds respectively.

However, the diversity problem in design education is not only in the numbers, but also in the lack of diverse role models. Students and educators point out that most design courses taught in the higher education institutions focus on “Anglocentric and Eurocentric ways of seeing”, just as most publications focus on Western design tradition. Movements such as Swiss Modernism, Bauhaus, Dada, De Stijl, and Art Deco are all heavily emphasized in design education, leaving non-Western tradition (such as design from Latin America, South America, Africa, and all of Asia) under-represented.

Danah Abdulla, designer, researcher, current programme director of graphic design at the Camberwell and Chelsea colleges, University of the Arts (UAL), explains, “Students are aware of the histories they’re being shown, and not shown. How often does a student of Indian origin gets to hear about a good Indian designer? What effect do you think that eventually has on how they perceive the profession?”

“Diversity in design means diversity of experience, perspective and creativity”

That is the position supported by Harriet Harriss, dean of the Pratt School of Architecture and former architecture and interior design research lead at the Royal College of Art. “You can’t be what you can’t see,” she says. ”And if marginalised students don’t see themselves represented on their reading lists and in their curriculum, this in turn leads to a feeling of being marginalised in the discipline”.

Here, we come across another term often being used interchangeably with “diversity” – “decolonization.” Though the terms are linked, diversity is about bringing more people to the table, while decolonization is about changing the way we think. For many decades, design values and history have been taught through a canon, the accepted pantheon of work by predominantly European and American male designers, that sets the basis for what is “good” or “bad.” The sad truth is that authority of the canon has undermined the work produced by non-Western cultures and those from poorer backgrounds so that Ghanaian textiles, for example, get classified as craft rather than design.

Abdulla is a part of the founding team of the Decolonising Design initiative, collectively curated online platform that looks to put design pedagogies under a lens, touching on issues such as post-colonialism and decolonialism, feminism, queerness and activism and exploring how these fit in to modern understandings and teachings of design by way of articles, resources and events. She points it out that we often consider design and design education as “neutral”, where we should go further into the politics of design practice. “For far too long, designers have remained married to the concept that what we do is neutral, universal, that politics has no place in design,” says Abdulla. Yet the choices we make as designers are intrinsically political: With every design choice we make, there’s the potential to not just exclude but to oppress; every design subtly persuades its audience one way or another and every design vocabulary has history and context. Learning about the history of colonialism will open our eyes to how power structures have formed society today, and how they dominate our understanding of design.”

Both Abdulla and Harriss suggest that radical curriculum changes should be a necessary approach to diversifying design education. Another direction in this work is propose by Aisha Richards, a MA tutor in applied imagination in the creative industries in University of Arts, London, and director of the Shades of Noir (SoN) programme, supporting race equality and its presence in art, design and communication higher education.

In her “Embedding equality and diversity in the curriculum: an art and design practitioner’s guide” co-authored with Terry Finnigan, Head of Widening Participation at London College of Fashion, UAL, she highlights that although an increasing number of students from black and minority ethnic backgrounds are choosing to study creative subjects, the large majority of staff employed to teach the subject remain mainly white. Although this area has been researched for over fifteen years, however, only recently some concrete actions have been taken. “When you don’t have the diversity of staff to offer the diversity of perspectives to the diversity of students, this is where a big part of the problem lies,” she says.

Richards insists that the higher education institutions should focus on ensuring whether or not minority students are “valued in a way that means they complete their education successfully,” rather than just seeking out ways to enroll more such students. She sees solutions for this challenge in curriculum design, staff training, establishment of safe spaces and community support. These are, according to Richards, an important part of levelling a historically and systematically uneven playing field.

At UAL, Richards and Finnigan created a unit entitled ‘Inclusive learning and teaching in higher education’ (ILTHE), that encourages students (academic members of staff) to reflect on themselves and their practice. They are required to discuss a range of diversity and equality issues through a blog, study literature and write an essay illustrating their understanding of these topics, and then undertake a curriculum innovation linked to their professional teaching context, which has proved to be the most transformational component. It has created some very interesting and proactive outcomes, such as the support of critical thinking including critical race theory, creation of pedagogical interventions, and support of innovation through collaborative working practices.

At the same time, in her work with Shades of Noir, Richards has begun to implement change at UAL with the final goal of equal representation throughout all levels of the institution. Lobbying with UAL’s Group for the Equality of Minority Staff (GEMS) for equal representation on interview panels and committees. The next target is to get equal representation on all committee co-chairs.

SoN has recently begun working with other institutions and is actively seeking to share its expertise and collaborate nationally and internationally. SoN offers higher education a range of activities that support change in behaviour and practice, through an online resource database, debates, exhibitions, workshops, curriculum design, audits, validation and reviews. Described as art schools’ critical friend and movement for change, SoN aims to address a lack of embedded representation, cultural currency and accessible knowledge in the creative curriculum and pedagogy within art, design and communication higher education.

It is crucial that race and gender are only part of the picture. According to American Institute of Graphic Arts (AIGA), the largest professional association of designers in the world, diversity in design means diversity of experience, perspective and creativity—otherwise known as diversity of thought—and these can be shaped by multiple factors including race, ethnicity, gender, age, sexual identity, ability/disability and location, among others. Lack of diversity – both in education and in profession – leads to apathy, insensitivity and even discrimination. On the contrary, from a practical (not to mention ethical) standpoint, diversity and inclusion within the field of design lead to more innovation through problem-solving, whether in service to business or society. And that’s what design is all about.

The novel coronavirus is already upending higher education as we know it, with many universities and other higher education institutions all over the globe being forced into online teaching. This has led many evangelists of online learning to make ambitious statements that the new golden era of online education has finally come, not only for the time of the crisis but with a potential to replace the face-to-face teaching altogether in the future.  It is impossible to overlook online learning’s positive aspects; however, the way it is presented as a simple and practical solution might be misleading.

Kyungmee Lee, Lecturer in Technology Enhanced Learning, Lancaster University, points out that the current rapid global adoption of online education is astonishing. To promote social distancing during the pandemic, most universities all over the globe have placed their courses and are delivering their teaching online. Many South Korean universities have moved their teaching online, providing students with the required number of classes without face-to-face contact with educators. In the UAE, the ministry of education announced that university teaching in the country would move online. In Italy, all universities closed, switching to online learning. In the USA, colleges were among the first institutions to take drastic action in response to the virus, cancelling in-person classes and moving most or all coursework online. This global shift to online learning follows the example set by universities in China, where the outbreak first began.

Peter Mayo, Professor at the University of Malta and author of Higher Education in a Globalising World: Community engagement and lifelong learning, believes that the good thing about the current situation is that “ it makes those who are resistant to modern digitally mediated technology take the plunge, whether adequately trained for this purpose or not. Many academics from Greece, Italy, Cyprus and the UK revealed that online learning is a new experience foisted on unprepared academics. It might enable them to transcend archaic ways.”

According to Bloomberg, many elite colleges, including small liberal arts schools, have resisted online teaching by trumpeting their small classes, mentoring from professors, and extracurricular activities, mostly in order to justify their tuition cost, which can top $70,000 a year. Still, even they are forced by the pandemic to switch to distance learning for at least the rest of the school year.

The history of education is full of episodes whereby necessity led to ingenuity. Mayo recalls the “flying university” in Poland that appeared under Nazi occupation, when Polish universities went underground and operated as distance learning institutions, with material “flying” from one place to another. It was innovative and attested to the resilience of the Polish academic community, both students and professors, involved. However, the present crisis, Mayo goes on, resembles, in certain cases, the situation during the immediate post revolution literacy campaigns in Latin America and elsewhere when young literacy workers were rushed to the field without adequate preparation.

Today we see educators throughout the world urged, if not compelled, to carry out their teaching online, irrespective of their training for this purpose. Lee warns that although undoubtedly, “online learning can make university education more accessible, affordable, interactive and student-centred”, when carefully implemented, it is important to “set realistic understandings and expectations of how it can support students affected by coronavirus measures.” This is especially the case for universities that disregarded online education before the coronavirus outbreak. The Bloomberg cites Michael Horn, co-founder of the Clayton Christensen Institute for Disruptive Innovation and a higher education consultant, who shares this concern: “Schools that haven’t historically embraced online education are now being forced into it. Rather than becoming a crowning moment for online education, this crisis could provoke a backlash.”

Basically, both academics and students may lack the training needed for quality online learning.  It is true that some higher education institutions have had adequate preparation for moving to online teaching, as a good percentage of their students are distance learning students. But it also should be mentioned that adequate training for teachers in this case implies that of a year’s duration. Describing the process of developing online course, Lee stresses that normally it involves a team of experts including academics, instructional designers, programmers and illustrators, who collectively follow systematic design processes. Still, Bloomberg refers to education technology researcher Bay View Analytics, saying that 70% of 1.5 million America’s faculty members have never taught a virtual course before.

This would mean that academics who have never taught online would be offering courses that have not been adequately developed. Many unprepared academics forced to suddenly adopt virtual learning  choose to read their lectures using a webcam and the same slides they used for face-to-face teaching as well as teach using Skype or software for videoconferencing to deliver the same lectures for the same 45 minutes. Phil Regier, the ASU dean, predicts that would be challenging to hold students’ attention in this case. “Here’s the first lesson,” he says. “There’s nothing more boring than a 45-minute video. They’re horrible; nobody can get through those.”

Lee also points out another problem connected with this simple ‘onlinification’: there are significant differences between presenting slides on projection screens in lecture theatres and on a smartphone screen. “The font size and page ratio of the slides needs to be carefully checked and revised to improve their readability,” she writes. “If course materials such as key texts are not properly digitised, students’ learning can be completely disrupted.”

This brings up another topic – student engagement. Retaining student interest in online learning can be even harder that in face-to-face classes – a fact proved by higher drop-out rates in online courses when compared to in-class teaching. Online learning can address mass students anywhere and at any time throughout the world, yet this form of delivery requires at least adequate access to high-speed internet from where they are self-isolated. This could be a problem for low-income students who do not have basic technological tools or for those in rural areas often lacking reliable internet access and videoconferencing capabilities. Some institutions in the US have responded to such concerns by expanding wireless internet hotspots into parking lots, allowing students without Wi-Fi at home to complete coursework and log in to online classes from their cars, but this looks more like a band-aid solution.

Researchers working on the use of online learning in higher education point out that dissatisfied students who find online learning inferior to face-to-face lectures may take action against universities. Thus, Lee provides an example of Korean students who, frustrated by the switch to online learning because of coronavirus measures, requested a refund of their tuition payment.

Another thing to be taken into consideration by academic staff is how to use modern technology in what Mayo calls “appropriate ways.” By appropriate ways he means avoiding the use of this technology as another surveillance mechanism: “Recorded sessions, ostensibly for the benefit of those who could not tune into the live session, can inhibit student participation in the discussions.” But as there are two parties participating in the remote learning process, Emma Pettit explores this topic at a different perspective in her article A Side Effect of Remote Teaching During Covid-19? Videos That Can Be Weaponized, after the head of the conservative political-action group Turning Point USA told college students whose professors had switched to online classes to share with Turning Point videos of “blatant indoctrination.”

During the ongoing crises, development of a plausible system of assessment and evaluation of student learning outcomes opens a new set of challenges. According to the Chronicle of Higher Education, many academics are trying to “keep their instruction simple, and to communicate to their students that they care.” For that purpose, institutions have relaxed their grading policies, requiring the courses be graded pass/fail. Such a measure can only be accepted as a temporary one, while the spread of the virus implies the situation in higher education will not change in a couple of weeks. Alternative assessment methods are necessary, for after the crisis is over, the degree programme must be recognised and therefore all learning outcomes must still be achieved and demonstrated despite contingency measures that were in place.

All above said proves that going online has to be carefully planned, and faculty members at the front line of this movement need clear communication and a whole university approach. To May Lim, an associate professor at the Singapore Institute of Technology, shares their experience of educating in the time of coronavirus. She writes, “While some faculty members already had competencies in online or remote teaching in four areas – live streaming, pre-recorded teaching sessions, facilitating discussions in a digital platform and providing assessment and receiving feedback – much background preparation still had to be done to get academic staff, students and infrastructure ready for lessons to transition seamlessly into online learning.»

A lot of training in all shapes and sizes was carried out for lecturers, including face-to-face workshops, walk-in consultations, online training and self-help guides. The topics covered how to create narrated slides, how to run effective live streaming classes, how to design alternative assessments, and the use of online proctoring tools for assessments. Students were also provided with guides how to use the tools and much was said about self-management and managing procrastination in order to work with students’ motivation and engagement. What also helped is pulse checking done on a regular basis two weeks after the online replacement of the classes, which enabled further tweaks to improve the experience. At the same time, online meetings conducted with teaching staff to share experiences helped rectify common mistakes that were made.

All said, distant learning has a huge potential to grow into the dominant form of teaching in higher education despite all the challenges. However rapid implementation of online education as the expense of quality may result in online education being discarded after the coronavirus outbreak ends. Universities should consider online learning not solely as a way for them to survive this moment but also an opportunity to thrive in the future.

The phrases ‘eLearning’ and ‘Distance Learning’ are often used interchangeably, but they’re actually two separate entities. We’ve teamed up with experts, to help you see the differences between the two, and how they affect you as a learner. Here’s everything you need to know.

What Αre eLearning And Distance Learning? Before we look at the differences between the two, we need to understand what these two concepts actually are.

eLearning: this form of learning is designed to create an online communication between the teacher and the student. Many schools are now using eLearning in order to complement the learning that’s done in the classroom. For example, homework may be set online, or quizzes can be taken with the rest of the class. It’s a new way of learning that suits a lot of learners, both school-aged and adult. Tutor James Anderson at State of Writing says, “We use eLearning in order to connect with our students. They can connect with us online, and we can work with them to improve their writing skills”.

Distance learning: this concept is more about the distance between the student and the teacher, and how technology bridges that gap. Many universities are now offering distance learning degrees, where the student attends school through their internet. That means a student in Europe could attend an American university, without ever having to move. It also makes attending higher education much easier if you live in rural or remote areas.

How Learning Works Online. Both methods of learning are able to help learners get more out of learning, wherever they are. The methods are slightly different, but they can overlap.

eLearning is used in local settings, so distance isn’t as much of a factor. For example, a teacher may use a quiz app to test children in their classroom. They can all get involved, and it makes learning fun for them. As well as this, it gives teachers more options in how to create engaging lesson plans. It’s helpful for adult learners too. eLearning can be accessed anytime and anywhere, so it fits into most people’s busy schedules. The ease of access means more adults are taking online courses and classes, to learn skills to get ahead.

Distance learning, on the other hand, is designed in order to be accessible no matter where you are in the world. It covers issues such as accessibility problems, so students can attend basic classes. This can be through webcams or chat programs.

The Benefits Οf Both Systems. There are benefits to both eLearning and distance learning. If you’ve never considered either of them before, then here’s why you may want to look into it further:

eLearning

• Makes learning more interactive. Many learners are turned off learning as they feel they’re just being talked at in the classroom. eLearning makes the process much more interesting and interactive. Their input is needed, and it helps them retain information better.
• Is convenient for adult learners. As mentioned earlier, adults find learning much easier when they’re doing so through eLearning systems. For example, Via Writing has found adults coming to them to improve their grammar skills, during their free time.
• Is at the learner’s pace. The learner can take part in learning at their own pace. There are eLearning materials that can be accessed whenever they need to be, meaning that the learner doesn’t have to worry about falling behind, or being ahead of the rest of the class, as there’s no class to hold them back.

Distance Learning

• Offers cheaper education. Distance learning can be a great option if you’re looking to save money on your education. As you don’t have to move away to a different city or country, you’re saving a lot of cash. As well as this, you’re also saving money on the courses themselves, as they’re often cheaper.
• Offers you the chance to take classes wherever you are. No matter where you are, you can take classes. This option is popular with people who need to stay put at home, such as parents or people caring for family members. It takes the pressure off you to get to a place of learning, so you can concentrate on what you’re learning instead.
• Gives you the opportunity not to take part in the classroom setting. Some people find that the classroom setting isn’t for them. This could be due to a disability, or simply because they’ve never enjoyed conventional learning. Websites like Grammarix have seen an upswing of visitors who are looking to learn at their own pace.

As you can see, there’s actually a real difference between eLearning and distance learning. eLearning is a style of learning, while distance learning is a method of attending class even if you can’t be there physically.

Traditionally, campus is perceived to be ‘the face of the university’, and the very idea of ‘going to the university’ is connected in our mind to the image of the campus as a physical place. However, given all the debate of the value of ‘traditional’ university education today, little is said about the value of campus life. There is every reason to believe that the impact of higher education increases dramatically when students in the university live on or attend campus offering a robust campus life program and an opportunity to interact with a range of people and ideas.

The  emergence  of  the  campus can  be  traced  back  to  the  universities  of medieval  Europe  where  scholarly  exchanges  occurred  in  intimate cloistered  settings.  Since then, universities created  a  strong  relationship between  learning  and  physical  place, with campus being a space that gives meaning to the learning process. Today, it is still a setting that provides the opportunity for social and intellectual interaction with a scholarly community as well as a place that engenders knowledge, self-discovery and personal transformation.

Dr Sarah French and Professor Gregor Kennedy of Melbourne Centre for the Study of Higher Education point it out, that over  the  course  of the  twentieth  century  the  role  of  the  campus  underwent  a  series  of  transitions. Universities  gradually  became  less  elite  and  more  inclusive  as  student  populations  expanded  beyond  the demographic  of  the  white  upper-class  male.  To accommodate  expanding  student  numbers,  they  became increasingly  larger  in  scale.

On the other hand, with the advance of distant education and online learning as well as development of social networks into informal learning communities, it became possible for students to study without physically attending a campus. The historical role of the campus was therefore displaced, giving way to non-campus based forms of learning. As a result, the pattern of students participation is changed correspondingly. According to the studies conducted by the Melbourne Centre for the Study of Higher Education, university students are attending campus less and choosing online modes of learning more due to the availability of online resources such as lecture recordings and class notes, and the increased number of hours students spend in paid employment and family commitments. To put it short, modern students are viewing physical attendance at campus more as an option than a necessity.

However, as Dr. Loren Rullman, Vice Provost for Student Affairs and Dean of Students at Grand Valley State University, perfectly puts it: ‘Going to a football game is very different than watching it on television, and experiencing new music, food, people, languages, music and ideas is very different than simply reading about them.’ As some formal learning activities move online, the reasons that students attend campus are changing too, mainly centering on opportunities to engage with academic staff directly, to participate in collaborative and interactive learning with peers and to be involved in social networks and activities.

The changing educational environment has prompted universities of the 21^st century to reconsider the role of the physical campus and redefine the campus experience. In his provocative  report  on  the  issues  facing  Canadian universities today, Stephen J. Toope argues that students will only continue to attend campus if two conditions are met: first, the  university  must  have  a  superior reputation or ‘brand,’ and second, the university must create an on-campus experience that is ‘so rich and unique that students feel drawn to participate actively’. Dr French and Professor Kennedy refer to University Trends: Contemporary Campus Design by Coulson, Roberts and Taylor, saying that the past decade has seen extensive interest in  the  physical  spaces  of  universities  within  the  fields  of  architecture  and  design.

There is a reverse side of the coin, as Dr. Rullman highights. With media constantly reporting about higher education spending on lavish campus facilities in recent years, campus today is often associated with “luxury dorms” or “amazing recreation centers,” and other seemingly excessive amenities. This makes one think that students are only attracted to luxurious campus facilities and that universities are motivated solely by the pressure of an amenities arms race.

Rullman emphasizes that to improve value for students and their families and aid public understanding, colleges and universities must insist on educational and institutional outcomes for facility development, having a clear picture of how the creation of new recreation centers, student center buildings, student success offices and similar facilities will contribute to the sum of a student’s education. “They do not replace what is in the classroom, and they should not be the primary reason a student selects a college. Most important, they must be responsibly developed to serve the institution’s mission,” he goes on.

Put it another way, newly designed  university  buildings  and  campus  spaces  should reflect  key  shifts in approaches to teaching and learning. For example, as lecture-based teaching methods have  become less dominant and collaborative  learning  more prominent, new campus designs should include fewer lecture theatres and more spaces designed for conversation and  interaction.

So what are the real reasons why colleges and universities should invest in their facilities? What is the true value of campus these days?

In their eponymous article, Dr Sarah French and Professor Gregor Kennedy centre around six broad interrelated areas:

• involvement in a scholarly community
• face-to-face interaction with academic staff
• opportunities to engage with campus-based modes of teaching and learning
• opportunities for collaborative, interactive and informal learning
• opportunities for student engagement through participation in extra-curricular activities
• opportunities for social contact and developing friendships.

According to the authors, ‘coming  to  campus provides students with the opportunity to be immersed in an intellectual culture, to gain expert knowledge from scholars and to explore ideas with peers <…> Aspects such as an institution’s architectural history, contemporary design features, landscaping, and the provision of accessible and appealing spaces in libraries, cafes and outdoor areas can all enhance the sense of involvement in a scholarly community.’ But what is more important, being on campus allows students to interact with academic staff benefiting from their expertise in specific disciplinary areas. Quality feedback and advice from scholars can often be more effectively delivered in face-to-face discussions rather than in written or online formats.

Adam Weinberg, president of Denison University, supports this opinion, as he explains how students might benefit from mentorship on campus. Student development staff, such as deans, health and counseling professionals, push students to get outside their comfort zones, to listen and hear other students, to reflect on their own world views and choices, and to learn. This happens when students come into their offices, when they supervise student employees, in meetings with student organizations, and when they bump into students walking around campus.

Weinberg also quotes the book How College Works by Dan Chambliss and Christopher Takacs, which presents research from a ten-year study of 100 students to learn what makes a successful college experience. They write, that  mentors “shape in detail a student’s experience: what courses they take or majors they declare; whether they play a sport or join an extracurricular activity; whether they gain skills, grow ethically, or learn whatever is offered in various programs.” Simply put, mentoring relationships “raise or suppress the motivation to learn.”

Speaking of opportunities for interactive and informal learning, Peter Jamieson argues that the entire campus should be viewed as a learning space. Outside the classroom, campus spaces should foster face-to-face communication, conversation and interaction between students in informal settings, which develops such skills as problem solving and critical thinking as well as values and habits students will need as adults.

As Weinberg put its, ‘the learning happens everywhere in formal and informal ways. For example, residential halls become places where students take what they are learning in classrooms and use it to learn to live and work with a diverse array of people in an ever-changing environment.’

Weinberg also connects campus experience and success in life. In his article he cites the research by the Gallup organization (presented in the Gallup-Purdue Index) which finds participation in extra-curricular activities and other activities outside the classroom to be one of the most significant predictors of success. “Students need to develop a broad array of soft and hard skills. No single curriculum can do it all. There is too much to learn and too few classes and courses to teach it all. Campus life is crucial to closing the gaps between what we teach in the curriculum and what students need to succeed,” Weinberg advises.

Indeed, the campus experience provides opportunities for an extensive range of academic, co-curricular and social forms of engagement. Activities organized by universities include orientation programs, competitions, workshops, public presentations, career information sessions, leadership and mentoring programs, engagements with workplace and industry and internships. Equally, student-led activities provide important opportunities for students to be involved in clubs and societies, sporting activities, the performing arts and music, creative writing, journalism, student politics and various other activities that can cultivate skills in areas such as leadership and communication. Students who take on a leadership role in a campus organization face all the usual management challenges in the workplace and in civic life that will help them build leadership in the future ‘grown-up’ lives.

Last but not least are social possibilities of on-campus study. Significant number of people report than they have met  their spouse and closets friends at university. The same is true about collegial networks cultivated by social encounters while studying, which often prove to be valuable in the workplace.

To sum it up, campus-based education is a great way for students to learn to voice views, hear others, and understand how to work together to create the communities they want to live in. Some campus facilities are designed to expose students to people with different backgrounds and ideas that may be new to them, others offer spaces for them to learn about organizing people and managing meetings, while the third are entirely educational. “Recreation facilities, dining centers, cultural spaces and the like give students opportunities to practice, make mistakes, form opinions, explore values and learn, lead and follow,” writes Rullman. “These facilities are worthy of investment because student learning is worthy of investment.”

The world of academia is becoming more personalized and convenient for students thanks to recent advancements in artificial intelligence (AI). The technology has numerous applications that are changing the way we learn, making education more accessible to students with computers or smart devices if they’re unable to make it to class. Students aren’t the only ones who benefit as AI is also helping to automate and speed up administrative tasks, helping organizations reduce the time spent on tedious tasks and increasing the amount of time spent on each individual student.

A recent study from eSchool News discovered that the use of AI in the education industry will grow by 47.5% through 2021 as we move towards a more connected world. The technology’s impact will exist anywhere from Kindergarten through higher education, offering the opportunity to create adaptive learning features with personalized tools to improve the student experience. The technology may be able to better inform students what their job prospects may look like based on their particular narrative as well, helping them beyond their academic life. WorkFusion is helping organizations with smart automation platforms that can improve the grading and filing process in the classroom.

Here are four ways AI is changing the education industry.

1. The Automation of Administrative Tasks
   As previously mentioned, AI has great potential in automating and expediting administrative tasks for both organizations and professors. Grading homework, evaluating essays and offering value to student responses is where educators spend the most time. AI can already automate the grading process in multiple choice tests in order to allow educators to spend more time with students one-on-one, but the technology may soon be able to do more than this. Software developers are creating new ways to grade written responses and essays as well. The admission process is also set to benefit as AI can automate the processing and classification of paperwork.
2. The Addition of Smart Content
   The concept of smart content is a hot topic now as robots can create digital content with the same degree of grammatical prowess as their human counterparts, and this technology has finally reached the classroom. AI can help digitize textbooks or create customizable learning digital interfaces that apply to students of all age ranges and grades. One such system called Cram101 uses AI to condense the content in textbooks into a more digestible study guide with chapter summaries, practice tests and flashcards. Another platform called Netex Learning allows lecturers and professors to design a digital curriculum and content across a variety of devices, including video, audio and an online assistant. Virtual content such as digital lectures and video conferences are also a reality now thanks to AI.
3. Smart Tutors and Personalization
   AI can do more than condense a lecture into flashcards and smart study guides as it can also tutor a student based on the difficulties they’re having with class material. In the past, students had a limited window of time in which they could see their professors, meaning office hours or hoping they answer their emails. There are now smart tutoring systems such as Carnegie Learning that use data from specific students in order to give them feedback and work with them directly. While this AI application is still in its early stages, it will soon be able to work as a full-fledged digital professor that helps a students with their educational needs in just about any area of need. Also, these platforms will soon be able to adapt to a wide variety of learning styles in order to help every educator and student.
4. Virtual Lecturers and Learning Environment
   Even your actual lecturer may soon be replaced by a robot. Well, not entirely, but there are already virtual human guides and facilitators that can think, act and react with humans by using gesture recognition technology in a natural way, responding both verbal and nonverbal cues. A more digital learning environment is also becoming a reality with institutions such as the University of Southern California (USC) Institute for Creative Technologies developing smart virtual environments and platforms. The organization uses AI, 3-D gaming and computer animation to create real virtual characters and social interactions. This initiative includes more than virtual facilitators as augmented reality may soon be part of the classroom as well.

Connecting the World of Academia

We are already in the future of education as institutions all around the U.S. and the rest of the globe have added AI to the classroom, hoping that it will make the students’ work easier. The technology is also slated to improve administrative tasks and improve the way lecturers run their classrooms. Plus, the technology will save billions in administrative costs for institutions across the nation, reducing overhead costs and paving the way for a smaller staff to operate effectively.

Most of us use social networking sites to catch up with friends, read the latest news, and share life events. However, an increasing number of organizations are now turning to social media for online training. For example, encouraging employees to network with industry experts in order to upskill. If you’re thinking about adding social media to your online training program, then you’re in luck. In this article, I’ll explore the top 5 advantages of using social media in online training and I’ll also share 4 notable drawbacks that you should consider before taking the leap.

The main benefits of using social media in online training

1. Improves Online Collaboration. Geographically dispersed employees aren’t able to interact with their colleagues in the real world. This makes it difficult to benefit from their experience and professional expertise. However, social media allows them to collaborate and communicate without any limitations. They can post informative links, share tips, and work together on team projects. Video conferencing tools even give them the opportunity to host virtual meetings where they can discuss important topics. Throw Project Management tools into the mix, and you have a powerful online collaboration strategy.
2. Employees Have Access To Round-The-Clock Support. Employees need access to information 24/7, not just during office hours. Social media offers them the chance to research topics and tasks whenever, wherever. They have access to industry professionals who can help them expand their knowledge and build skills. Employees also have the power to provide tips, tricks, and advice to their peers. In short, using social media in online training opens up a world of possibilities for your employees, especially when it comes to peer-based feedback and support.
3. Keeps Employees Up-To-Date. Social media keeps employees up-to-date with the latest online training and company news. Organizations can post event reminders, new online training course notifications, and changes to company policy. They also have the ability to share online resources, such as multimedia links to broaden employees’ understanding. As an example, YouTube tutorials that improve task proficiency or podcasts that cover compliance topics. For best results, start a corporate eLearning blog or social media group to centralize your communications.
4. Facilitates Ongoing Online Training Feedback. In addition to tips and valuable advice, co-workers also have the opportunity to give and receive feedback. Employees are able to post their ideas or even upload online training projects for peer review. Their colleagues can spot strengths and recommend improvements. Just make sure to set some ground rules so that everyone benefits from the online training experience. For example, create netiquette guidelines to avoid online conflicts.
5. Increases Employee Motivation And Engagement. Facebook, Twitter, and LinkedIn cater to our social nature. Employees get to interact with peers and work collaboratively to solve problems. Online support, advice, and feedback all helps boost their motivation and engagement. As a result, they are more likely to actively participate in the online training process. Social media can even cultivate a sense of community, which makes employees feel like they are part of something bigger.

The drawbacks of using social media in online training

1. Social Media Becomes A Distraction.The number one reason why organizations are hesitant about social media is misuse. Let’s face it, social media can be a major distraction. You have every intention of researching important topics and looking up tips, then you end up chatting with friends. Or you may not be able to resist your favorite app or game. Before you know it, an hour has passed and you haven’t done any research. The good news is that your organization can create guidelines to keep employees on track. First and foremost, you must hold employees accountable. Incorporate social media activities into your online training strategy and follow-up with an online assessment. For instance, ask employees to interview an expert or focus on a specific training topic. Then quiz them after the fact to gauge their understanding and progress.
2. Online Learning Communities Require Time And Resources. Creating and maintaining social media groups, corporate eLearning blogs, and forums is time consuming. Managers and corporate trainers must monitor these social media platforms, which requires payroll hours. After all, online learning communities don’t run themselves. One of the most effective ways to cut costs is to limit the number of social media platforms you use and opt for low-maintenance options. For example, Facebook features groups and a variety of built-in online tools, such as calendars and polls. Appoint someone to post on a weekly basis to keep the discussion flowing. This individual can also monitor the page and share valuable resources.
3. Exposure To Excessive Information May Contribute To Cognitive Overload. Social media’s strength is that it facilitates knowledge sharing. That also happens to be one of its drawbacks. Employees are exposed to large quantities of information at once, which can lead to cognitive overload. They may be unable to focus on one topic or task because there’s a constant flow of data. Once again, asking employees to concentrate on a specific research topic can prevent cognitive overwhelm. Ask them a targeted question or create a prompt that centers their thoughts.
4. Online Behavior May Compromise Your Brand Image. Your organization works hard to maintain its online reputation. As such, you don’t need employees behaving badly on social media and tarnishing your image. Bear in mind that everything your employees post on social networking sites is visible to the public. The exception being closed groups and online forums. However, employees will uphold your brand image if they know what’s at stake. Stress the importance of proper online etiquette and create a strong sense of corporate culture. Employees who are proud to be part of the organization are more likely to become brand advocates.

Social media can be a powerful online training resource, when used correctly. Online training guidelines and employee accountability can help to counteract the drawbacks. Use these benefits and consider the drawbacks to successfully integrate social networking sites into your corporate eLearning strategy.

Have you ever thought what you are going to do after you get your degree in design? Despite the generally accepted misconception, design graduates are not at all limited to career paths within the artistic sector. It may not seem obvious but companies like Google and IBM rely on design graduates to move their industry forward. Design mindset and qualified designers who act as problem-solvers are eagerly sought after in this type of industry, and design advocates of these forward-thinking corporations explain why.

Times Higher Education stresses that it’s a common misconception that designers should be employed in design companies – a misconception that the Design Council is determined to challenge; designers are needed in every organisation and in every industry.

As a design advocate for Google, Mustafa Kurtuldu is charged with championing design to the technology industry and everyone internally at Google.

“Design used to be seen as a bunch of creative people wasting their time,” he says. “But that is not the case any more as some of the most successful businesses are discovering.”

He is not wrong. Industries are elevated by pioneering designs every day. “Big companies are looking at industries and saying: ‘I can change this, this is failing, and we can do better’,” he says.

It is this type of industry insight that has shaped the Design Council’s innovative learning programme for students – the Design Academy.

The programme has three ambitions. First, to make graduates more employable across a wider range of industries while equipping them with the skills to navigate evolving businesses.

Second, to provide a space where faculties may collaborate, bringing together students and staff from a range of disciplines to work on challenges.

Finally, to enable designers to become more strategic in their thinking and support students from other disciplines (such as engineering, business and science) to think in a more design-led manner.

Google is an engineering company – so it’s not obvious that the company runs on design thinking, Mustafa points out.

But it is at the heart of everything that Google does. The Double Diamond, developed by the Design Council, is implemented at the company. This process generates several ideas before choosing the best one.

So, in practice, this means that at Google different people from different specialisms and departments get together to discuss problems.

Evidence and data are brought to the table and ideas start flowing. When a consensus is reached, a design (often more than one) is sketched out and everyone votes. The winning idea enters testing and, if it gets past that point, it could reach the pilot stage.

Lots of Google products have used this methodology including self-driving cars and Google Maps. “Design is not about designers”, Mustafa says, “it’s about collaboration. At university, we were taught to work in isolation but actually the opposite approach is needed.”

IBM is another huge tech company that recognises the invaluable input that design graduates can provide.

“We have a programme and a mission to [inspire] a designers’ mindset in our company,” Matt Candy, the vice-president for IBM iX, says. “We need everyone to think like a designer, but we don’t need everyone to be a designer.”

He oversees a multidisciplinary team across the UK, the Republic of Ireland and Europe that applies design thinking and puts emerging technology to work, helping clients with the biggest business challenges of the future.

IBM have hired approximately 1,800 designers but have an employee base approaching 400,000 “non-designers” all incorporating design ideas into their roles.

When designers come to the organisation, IBM trains them in the “missing semester of design school”, Matt explains. “We are talking about critical problem-solving skills, applying design skills to business and bridging this intersection with technology.”

As a forerunner to the missing semester programme, Matt sees the Design Council’s Design Academy as the perfect kick-off point. “At IBM Design, we strongly believe that great design is about crafting memorable experiences that delight users and help shape the future. We believe that the Design Academy offers a fantastic opportunity for students to begin that journey.”

“Our belief is that brands and businesses need to be redesigned and not re-amplified through better messages, better advertising. Design thinking is the science of the 21st century, so using that approach for problem-solving is the way in which businesses will reinvent themselves and still be here in five years’ time,” Matt adds.

IBM launched its corporate design programme in 1956. “[Even back then,] we looked at [the] reinvention and redesign of our processes and we are still looking at them. This includes marketing, how we go about our HR practices, our products and [the] services we produce, how we help our clients [with] how they design their businesses, [and] how they build new experiences and engage with their customers. Design is essential.”

When IBM say that everyone must have a design mindset, they mean everyone. Those at the top live and breathe design as much as those working on the ground. “We have top-down conviction. Our chairman and chief executive officer are leading our transformation through design and agile ways of working. We tell everyone that we are a 106-year-old start-up,” adds Matt.

When recruiting, Matt says that they look for graduates who “approach problems from a different perspective. I need designers because designers are problem-solvers. And the problems that the world has today need a different way [of thinking] to solve those problems. It is the best time ever if you are a creator. Design is the new frontier for business.”

In the article “Sharpen Your Skills: The Value of Multidisciplinary Design” designer Peter Varadi mentions that designers only benefit their careers when they dare to venture beyond boundaries of their own disciplines. ‘Learning about different methods, tools, and skills’ he goes on, ‘helps broaden our internal problem-solving libraries and provides us with deeper decision-making context’.

Martin Temple, chairman of the UK Design Council, points it out that ‘the economic goal of generating more wealth from new science demands multidisciplinary teams of designers, engineers and technologists designing around the needs of customers.’ As their National Survey of Firms shows, 45% of firms in the UK that don’t use design compete mainly on price, while just 21% of firms where design is significant do so. Research has also shown that between 1995 and 2004, the share prices of design-conscious companies outperformed other firms by 200%. Therefore, the use of design is linked to improved business performance including turnover, profit and market share. On top of that, design can enhance the outcomes of numerous innovation activities, through increased quality of goods and services, improved production flexibility and reduced materials costs. The role of design in mobilising innovation is constantly increasing as well.

Therefore, the goal of design education today is to train specialists with broad set of skills, ‘who can turn ideas into working products’, as Sir James Dyson puts it. To which multidisciplinary approach to design education is the answer.

According to the report by the UK Design Council, unlike ‘interdisciplinarity’ which attempts to integrate or synthesise perspectives from several disciplines, ‘multidisciplinarity’ describes situations in which several disciplines cooperate but remain unchanged. This is the case with the ongoing attempts to teach design and creative problem solving alongside business and management education and/or technical and science subjects (the so-called STEM subjects).

Despite the fact cross-disciplinary practice has been embedded in universities for more than 40 years, it is only over the last decade, leading higher education institutions have grown to be actively engaged in developing new curricula, which enable design students to work in collaboration with other disciplines. In some cases this has led to the formation of new teaching and research centres, while in others the focus has been on integrating design within existing courses.

Design schools in the UK and USA have been integrating design and business education for years. For example, Kingston University which was named by the Guardian the best university to study design in in 2020, offers a suite of Masters in Creative Economy (MACE) courses. These multidisciplinary, one-year full-time (two-year part-time) courses are directed by the Faculty of Business and Law in partnership with the Faculty of Art, Design and Architecture and cover five areas of study: Built Environment, Design Industries, Heritage and Visual Arts, Performing Arts, and Media.

Similarly, the Royal College of Art in London has announced plans to expand its science and technology programme, adding courses focused on topics like nano-robotics and machine-learning, as well as embedding scientific collaboration into its existing postgraduate programmes. Aiming to ‘transform the accepted paradigm of an art and design university’ and ‘reverse the current orthodoxies’, RCA also plans to strengthen ties with Imperial College and other London institutions offering science and engineering courses. ‘This is a move away from the paradigm of the 20th-century art school to a 21st-century trans-disciplinary graduate school,’ said the college’s vice-chancellor Paul Thompson. ‘Our academic vision brings creative arts and design together with science, technology and medicine.’

Finland with its pioneering role in developing education in Europe has started Aalto University, an entirely multidisciplinary university that brings together the University of Art and Design Helsinki, the Helsinki University of Technology and the Helsinki School of Economics. Offering multidisciplinary courses including the International Design Business Management programme, the university has also established an experimental platform for multidisciplinary education and innovation, the Design Factory, which is designed to enable conversations, connections and creativity between business, design and engineering.

More recently, Asian countries have been investing in multidisciplinary design education. Design is the third most popular university subject in China after English and Computer Science. For instance, South Korea has set up a Convergent Design Education Programme, aimed to develop multidisciplinary activities in eight universities. The leading industry players of the country, such as Samsung, are also involved in design education, funding multidisciplinary programmes and supporting main design universities to embed such initiatives.

As the industry’s leading minds agree that most wanted nowadays are the so called T-shaped people, who combine depth of highly trained specialists with understanding of other disciplines and professional contexts, it is crucial that multidisciplinary courses and projects help design students develop this sought-after mix of skills. The offered experience of working with business schools, science, technology faculties and engineering courses should not only broaden design students’ skills sets but also better prepare them for working in the industry. Among other benefits of multidisciplinary approach to design education, it is important products designers understand materials and production methods as well as be able to decide where it is appropriate to shift away from traditional tooling towards rapid manufacturing, and this is only possible  while working with engineering students, materials scientists and computing specialists. Similarly, working with scientists and technologists will broaden design graduates’ knowledge of emerging technologies, to say nothing of complex global issues, such as climate change, which can only be addressed by teams whose members understand issues outside of their individual field of specialization. Last but not least, tomorrow’s designers need to be able to understand their clients’ businesses and the markets in which those businesses operate. Having design students work in multidisciplinary teams, especially on real-life briefs, helps them to develop a deeper understanding of business contexts.

Multidisciplinarity is by no means a one way street. Other disciplines, particularly business, computing and science, engineering and technology subjects, also benefit from connecting with design disciplines. Such collaborations between institutions as Design London building on heritage of cross-institutional collaboration between Imperial College Business School, Imperial College Faculty of Engineering and the Royal College of Art, and Centre for Competitive Creative Design (C4D) is a partnership between Cranfield University and the London College of Communication, University of Arts London, enable students of other non-design disciplines to develop design thinking and creativity.

It is obvious, that with developing and converging of industries, traditional education will fail to supply them with people who have an appropriate and useful mix of skills and experience. It is also no secret, that a team of differently skilled people working together and bringing into the project the mix of their skills drives innovation. As UK Design Council reports, skills that are increasingly valued by companies in all sectors include creativity, flexibility and adaptability, communication and negotiation skills, and management and leadership skills. All of those are the main focus of multidisciplinary courses and programmes that exist today and are yet to come, for being a designer means being able to push past obvious answers in order to create solutions that enhance the human experience.