Author: by R Brian Stone
Title: Blurring Boundaries: Interactive Multimedia and Interdisciplinary Convergence
Source: AIGA Journal of Interactive Design Education
Date: November 14, 2004

Abstract of Major Ideas
The premise of Professor Stone’s article, Blurring Boundaries: Interactive Multimedia and Interdisciplinary Convergence, is that in order for interactive multimedia applications to progress, an interdisciplinary approach is necessary. By combining the expertise of students and/or professionals in visual communications, industrial design, interior design, computer human interaction (HCI) and cognitive engineering it is possible to improve interactive media applications from website interfaces to digital cameras and mobile phones beyond what is possible when only one discipline is involved.

In his paper Professor Stone uses two examples to illustrate his points. One example shows how an interdisciplinary group of students redesigned the interface of a consumer model digital camera. In this example the interface obscured the photographic image displayed on the LCD screen. Redesigning the menu system provided a better experience for the user by making more of the image visible.

Critical Evaluation of Major Ideas
Professor Stone has not only written about his ideas of “cross pollination” within interactive multimedia design, but also put them to use in the classroom. In his paper he describes the success of this experiment by presenting the work his students produced while working in a class comprised of forty percent visual communication students, forty percent industrial design students and twenty percent cognitive engineering students. After the course students were able to identify how different disciplines contribute to design problems and see the value offered by interdisciplinary collaboration.

I feel that Professor Stone’s arguments are valid. Getting the perspective of a wide audience is important because we are all integrated into an environment where we use interactive applications daily. ATMs, mobile phones, media players and laptop computers are all commonplace items. Redesigning these tools to work better and making them easier to use has broad, positive implications.

I do believe that the interdisciplinary approach is a good idea and can work well in a graduate school environment, but it might be more difficult to implement for undergraduate students. In order for the approach to be effective I feel that it is necessary for the parties involved to have a high level of expertise. This might not be as prevalent among undergraduates and could therefore lead to frustration among students involved in interdisciplinary group projects.

Implications for Design Education
The implications of Professor Stone’s ideas for design education are profound. Too often individual colleges at universities tend to focus on their field without reaching out regularly to other disciplines. Even departments within a college may lack active collaboration. Getting a visual communications instructor to collaborate or team teach with a computer science, or engineering instructor might be a difficult task in such environments, but the results are likely to benefit the students, instructors and the interactive media field at large.

Author: Jason Aristofanis Tselentis
Title: Software ≠ Interactive Design
Source: AIGA Journal of Interactive Design Education
Date: March 7, 2006

Abstract of Major Ideas
In Mr. Tselentis’ paper Software ≠ Interactive Design, he proposes that when learning how to use software students fall into one of two different categories – either self-reliant or instructor-reliant. The instructor-reliant students need to become self-reliant; otherwise the class content is likely to revolve around learning the menus and toolbars of specific software.

This outcome is futile because the software is likely to either change significantly in the future or be replaced by another tool. Instilling self-confidence in the students helps them become more comfortable experimenting and playing with the applications. This in turn allows the curriculum to focus on the history, trends and theories relevant to the course.

Critical Evaluation of Major Ideas
In the graphic design and interactive media design fields, many institution’s courses focus heavily on teaching the ins and outs of computer applications such Photoshop, Illustrator, Flash, and Dreamweaver. To a degree the industry demands that graduates are proficient in these and other related platforms. However, the software tools are rapidly being changed or replaced to keep up with competitors and the demands of professionals in the industry. It follows then that students need to develop the skills required to adapt to the technology as it advances as quickly and efficiently as possible. It is not practical for an employer to send their employees out for re-training every time a new version of specific software is released. More often than not, employees are expected to learn how to use new and updated tools on their own in a self-reliant manner.

Implications for Design Education
Mr. Tselentis’ ideas on this matter have been in use by educators for many years. At the Art Institutes International Minnesota, course titles and descriptions do not contain any mention of specific software applications even though it is understood that they will be covered in the classroom. I have been teaching in the Interactive Media Design program at the Art Institutes for five years and have encountered the dichotomy of self and instructor reliant students that Mr. Tselentis describes. The structure of the class and lab/studio time, and the design of projects and assignments are meant to accommodate both types of software learners. Classes meet for a total of six hours a week. A minimum of two hours are set aside for lectures, discussions and demonstrations. The remaining three to four hours per weeks are dedicated to lab/studio time with the instructor and teaching assistant aiding students in groups or individually. Peer learning is encouraged and consistently helps motivate students toward becoming self-reliant software learners.

Author: Frank Armstrong
Title: Hearing Type
Source: AIGA Journal of Interactive Design Education
Date: June 27, 2005

Abstract of Major Ideas
In his paper Hearing Type, Frank Armstrong describes an interesting analogy between music and both static and kinetic typography. He compares specific properties of music to typography including rhythm, melody, and harmony. Rhythm can be used to describe type in many ways, such as shape, strokes, and punctuation for both moving and static examples. Melody is the message or meaning of the type, while harmony describes the interaction of columns or lines of type to each other.

He also compares an individual glyph to a sound or tone, using the amplitude to describe the weight of a character, duration to the width of a series of glyphs, pitch to the vertical positioning of the type, and timbre to the color, texture and style of the type. Armstrong suggests that using such analogies can help students better understand both static and kinetic typography by providing a different perspective or frame of reference.

Critical Evaluation of Major Ideas
It isn’t difficult for one to visualize comparisons between audible tones in music and glyphs or phrases of type. Armstrong also brings up the example of sheet music to strengthen his point. Certainly sheet music is another form of typography and is used to produce music output as sound, just as type, when read, produces audible speech. Armstrong quotes musicians, typographers, graphic designers, and physicists who have made similar comparisons.

These analogies might be useful in the ways that Armstrong suggests. I know from teaching audio production that I frequently use visual analogues to describe sound, such as comparing bitmap imagery to digital audio. There seems to be a shortage of adjectives in the English language that are used exclusively to describe sound. When we describe the timbre of a sound we use words like warm, cool, crisp, bright, or dark. All these words are usually used to describe other things like temperature, color or texture.

I agree with Armstrong’s position. It’s often very useful to compare and contrast different art forms. I think it is also important to look carefully at what the differences are between these art forms as well as the likenesses, so that students are getting the whole story.

Implications for Design Education
Armstrong’s paper raises an interesting perspective within the field of typography. The essence is that music and type are both forms of language; therefore they have parallels that can be illustrated to give students and designers a new frame of reference that might provide inspiration. I would not discourage instructors from using similar analogies, but I would suggest that they also make it clear that typography is not literally sheet music (although it could be interpreted as such through the use of visual scores), just as spoken text is not necessarily musical.