Vote NO! to Georgia Tech's Proposed BS in Design
On July 20th, the Georgia Tech College of Architecture (CoA) announced a new "strategic emphasis on interdisciplinarity." This effort centers on structural and curricular changes including eliminating the undergraduate degrees in architecture, building construction and industrial design. The current degrees will be replaced with a generically focused BS in design.
Dean Alan Balfour and Senior Associate Dean Doug Allen are leading the process. Associate Dean Sabir Khan is leading development of the new curriculum.
It is our belief that this combined degree will be detrimental to the college and the institute. Students will graduate without adequate skills or an appropriate credential to seek meaningful employment in their preferred discipline. Particularly with respect to industrial design and building construction, graduate education is not required, nor is it common when entering the field. The move to a generic BS in design will put Georgia Tech graduates at a distinct disadvantage to their peers from other universities.
CoA acknowledges this position by saying "This [curriculum] enables students to develop expertise in an area of interest as well as prepare themselves for their chosen field of graduate study. The curriculum is designed to enable students to receive a Masters in Architecture or Masters in Industrial Design degree in two additional years, or to receive an MS degree in Building Construction in one additional year." It is of note that the current undergraduate curriculum prepares students to receive these same advanced degrees in the same amount of time, while still having the option to enter their chosen profession after completing a bachelor's degree.
We believe the smaller programs in the College, industrial design (193 students) and building construction (320 students), will likely suffer the most with this new degree. It is inevitable that greater emphasis will be placed on architecture (582 students) than on the other disciplines in the combined curriculum, resulting in less focus and expertise in the areas of industrial design and building construction.
Evidence of this skewed emphasis is seen in the curriculum for the Common Freshman Year (CFY). Designed to provide incoming students with background in each of CoA's disciplines, the CFY has been taught predominately by architecture faculty, with a predictable focus on architecture. The CFY experience provides little confidence that the proposed BS in design will be much more than the current BS with a Major in Architecture.
We understand the economic pressures that face the College of Architecture. It is undeniable that the combined BS in design will lower the cost of delivering undergraduate education within the CoA. Further, we understand the impulse throughout all of higher education to push larger and larger numbers of people into graduate education. However, we believe the competitive costs to the Institute will be severe. If this plan is instituted, it would be a very difficult case to make to a prospective student that a generic BS in design from Georgia Tech is preferable to a BS in Building Construction from the University of Florida or a Bachelor of Industrial Design from Auburn. The former will be well qualified to apply to graduate school, while the latter will be welcomed by the professional world as well as having the option of continuing their education.
Please sign this petition in support of keeping the existing undergraduate degree programs in the CoA at Georgia Tech. Additionally, please reach out to all interested parties at Georgia Tech and the Board of Regents to express your concerns regarding these potential changes.
Georgia Institute of Technology
College of Architecture
Dean's Office
247 4th Street NW
Atlanta, GA 30332-0155
ATTN: Alan H. Balfour
alan.balfour@coa.gatech.edu
Georgia Institute of Technology
Office of the President
Mail Stop 0325
Atlanta, GA 30332
ATTN: G.P. "Bud" Peterson
bud.peterson@gatech.edu
Office of the Chancellor
Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia
Suite 7025
270 Washington Street, SW
Atlanta, GA 30334
ATTN: Erroll B. Davis, Jr.
Chancellor
Additional information can be found here: http://www.coa.gatech.edu/academics/cfy/index.php
On July 20th, the Georgia Tech College of Architecture (CoA) announced a new "strategic emphasis on interdisciplinarity." This effort centers on structural and curricular changes including eliminating the undergraduate degrees in architecture, building construction and industrial design. The current degrees will be replaced with a generically focused BS in design.
Dean Alan Balfour and Senior Associate Dean Doug Allen are leading the process. Associate Dean Sabir Khan is leading development of the new curriculum.
It is our belief that this combined degree will be detrimental to the college and the institute. Students will graduate without adequate skills or an appropriate credential to seek meaningful employment in their preferred discipline. Particularly with respect to industrial design and building construction, graduate education is not required, nor is it common when entering the field. The move to a generic BS in design will put Georgia Tech graduates at a distinct disadvantage to their peers from other universities.
CoA acknowledges this position by saying "This [curriculum] enables students to develop expertise in an area of interest as well as prepare themselves for their chosen field of graduate study. The curriculum is designed to enable students to receive a Masters in Architecture or Masters in Industrial Design degree in two additional years, or to receive an MS degree in Building Construction in one additional year." It is of note that the current undergraduate curriculum prepares students to receive these same advanced degrees in the same amount of time, while still having the option to enter their chosen profession after completing a bachelor's degree.
We believe the smaller programs in the College, industrial design (193 students) and building construction (320 students), will likely suffer the most with this new degree. It is inevitable that greater emphasis will be placed on architecture (582 students) than on the other disciplines in the combined curriculum, resulting in less focus and expertise in the areas of industrial design and building construction.
Evidence of this skewed emphasis is seen in the curriculum for the Common Freshman Year (CFY). Designed to provide incoming students with background in each of CoA's disciplines, the CFY has been taught predominately by architecture faculty, with a predictable focus on architecture. The CFY experience provides little confidence that the proposed BS in design will be much more than the current BS with a Major in Architecture.
We understand the economic pressures that face the College of Architecture. It is undeniable that the combined BS in design will lower the cost of delivering undergraduate education within the CoA. Further, we understand the impulse throughout all of higher education to push larger and larger numbers of people into graduate education. However, we believe the competitive costs to the Institute will be severe. If this plan is instituted, it would be a very difficult case to make to a prospective student that a generic BS in design from Georgia Tech is preferable to a BS in Building Construction from the University of Florida or a Bachelor of Industrial Design from Auburn. The former will be well qualified to apply to graduate school, while the latter will be welcomed by the professional world as well as having the option of continuing their education.
Please sign this petition in support of keeping the existing undergraduate degree programs in the CoA at Georgia Tech. Additionally, please reach out to all interested parties at Georgia Tech and the Board of Regents to express your concerns regarding these potential changes.
Georgia Institute of Technology
College of Architecture
Dean's Office
247 4th Street NW
Atlanta, GA 30332-0155
ATTN: Alan H. Balfour
alan.balfour@coa.gatech.edu
Georgia Institute of Technology
Office of the President
Mail Stop 0325
Atlanta, GA 30332
ATTN: G.P. "Bud" Peterson
bud.peterson@gatech.edu
Office of the Chancellor
Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia
Suite 7025
270 Washington Street, SW
Atlanta, GA 30334
ATTN: Erroll B. Davis, Jr.
Chancellor
Additional information can be found here: http://www.coa.gatech.edu/academics/cfy/index.php
We the undersigned appreciate your interest in evolving the curriculum for the undergraduate students in the College of Architecture in order to better prepare these students for the interdisciplinary collaboration required by business in the 21st century. However, we do not believe that a Bachelor of Science in Design will accomplish this goal.
It is our belief that this combined degree will be detrimental to the college and the institute. Students will graduate without adequate education, skills, or an appropriate credential to seek meaningful employment in their preferred discipline.
We ask that you abandon this approach and reinvest in the existing undergraduate programs, curriculum and faculty in order to insure that these programs become leading edge within their disciplines.
Sounds like a terrible idea to me... It will only make Tech grads less competitive and specialized.
Principal Architect, MSI '98 BSAppPhys
BS ID, 1974; MS ISyE, 1978
BS Building Construction 1998
Seems Tech is not thinking very logically; do they think about how business and industry will view this move? Believe this downgrades Tech's standing.
One of my best friends majored in ID and so did my sister. It's a fabulous program and should remain an option at Georgia Tech. The fact that it's offered at so few schools already really helps keep GT on the map for out of state students.
Graduated Tech with a BSID in 2003, currently in Marketing at McMaster-Carr. I traveled 1200 miles to attend the specific ID program offered exclusively by Georgia Tech, specifically, a Bachelors of Science degree in Industrial Design – not an art degree, and not a generic design degree. And as a product of the Common Freshman Year, I can attest to its ineffectual structure and focus. Instead of feeling like a well-rounded student of design, I came away from that year feeling lost and far behind my peers in other Industrial Design programs (SCAD, Auburn, AIFL, etc). The idea of design as a general subject that they are trying to force into a single program is not only bad in theory, but they themselves have proven to be poor in practice. Additionally, it sounds as though they're trying to extend the number of years a student is locked into the program for a degree in their field - not at the benefit of the student, but at the benefit of the college’s tuition profits. I cannot stress enough what a bad choice this will be for the future students, the current students, the alumni, the school, and the profession field of today and the future!!
GT Grad in BC in 2003. I am currently a property manager with Meadows & Ohly. If the program was set up this way when I was in school, I would not have majored in Building Construction. I do not see the merits of a BS in Design, and did not see the merits in the common first year studio. I feel this is moving the BC program away from what we really need to focus on to help us do our jobs on a day to day basis. Now that BC graduates are finally making an impact on the construction industry in Georgia and are well respected, it is very sad that we are moving in this direction because we will lose the students who are interested in the actual construction and construction management.
Manager of Industrial Design Husqvarna
Sr. Data Analyst Horizon Software, Intl. Georgia Tech B.S. CmpE '04
Industrial designers need very specific skills. As the person in charge of screening applicants at TEAMS Design USA, I can guarantee you that a generic BS will not get your students' portfolios in any kind of shape to be hired on as an industrial designer. Conversely, a marketing or business undergraduate degree usually prepares graduates with the skills that allow them to be hired upon graduation. I believe that too many "design" programs are out there swindling students out of money. If you start giving out generic degrees, you will be joining the illustrious swindler ranks.
I graduated BS of ID in 2003 and started work later that summer that has lead me to working for the BBC in London for the past 5 years. I actually started my freshman year studying to become an Architect. After quickly realizing that I was not suited for that specific career, I began looking for something a bit more creatively fulfilling. That's when I found Industrial Design and it was a life saver. The beauty of the CoA is that it has the diverse career choices. I often went back to check in on my freshman classmates to see what projects they were working on throughout their time there and the difference was striking. I knew I had made the right choice, but was still interested in their progress. I cannot comprehend how combining these degrees would strengthen the students ability to focus on a desired path. Use open courses to take a peek into the other degrees but keep them separate and distinct. Thank you. Mike Fischetti
Very bad idea.don't diminish the strength I.D. has/is working for by diluting it.This idea will do diservice to both diciplines.It should be obvious............ "you have a degree in what? What is that,please explain... Well the College thought that if they combine and rename the uh...uh..I......I can't"
What good would this serve the graduate of this program? Surely this would not help them secure a job. Sounds like a community college offering. While being a generalist is a benefit in the design field not having the specialized training and education is a step in the wrong direction. We already have too many graduates who can talk the talk but cannot execute. This decision is obviously being made by someone who is completely out of touch with the industry or who does not care if GT loses potential applicants to other institutions. Principal MINIMAL Inc. www.mnml.com
While it is the right of the university to change curriculum as they wish, it is wrong that they would take something so valuable away from their students. While a BS in Design is better than no design at all, the subtle differences between our disciplines are vital to our knowledge and design education. Those differences are huge in the eyes of a designer and eliminating the opportunity to learn them would be doing a huge disfavor to the students once they move into their chosen fields.
I am a working professional in the area of product design. I've worked with major corporations and now with my own studio and from my experience I was disappointed with how prepared I was to work as an industrial designer, and this was back when Tech had a 4 year ID degree. I believe that the job market is becoming more specialized and general understanding of topics just don't cut it anymore, unless one wants to be a manager. In the working world, there is very high specialization of skill set in order to be competitive. For example, you can't be a working designer without solid ability/training in atleast one of the following: sketching, ideating, CAD renderings, and/or research. I am genuinely concerned that by generalizing these degrees, the future graduates will be even less prepared, because when they graduate, a year's worth of sketching and elementary CAD work will not be enough to compete with the next candidate with 4 solid years of design study to hone their technical and design thinking skills.
