All over for department of design

Prof Sir David Skegg
Prof Sir David Skegg
About 20 students watched from the public gallery yesterday as the University of Otago council voted to disestablish the department of design studies.

The students were subdued as a package of nine recommendations was endorsed by an overwhelming majority and they walked out quietly after voting was completed.

Only three council members, including student representatives Harriet Geoghegan and Victoria Nicholson, voted against the package.

Two weeks ago, more than 200 students held a silent protest as the design studies proposals were debated by the senate, the university's main academic committee.

That committee meets behind closed doors.

The recommendations, proposed to address financial and academic issues, also include the end of design studies as a study major, the transfer of clothing and textile sciences staff to the department of applied science and the merger of two applied science programmes into a single degree stream.

However, vice-chancellor Prof Sir David Skegg said yesterday the move did not mean the end of design studies at the university, calling the changes "positive and exciting".

The master of design interdisciplinary degree would continue to be offered and design studies would be available as a minor study subject.

Transitional arrangements would be made to enable current design students to complete their qualifications in a reasonable time.

Prof Skegg criticised the Otago Daily Times for what he said was "a degree of misreporting and misinformation" about the proposed changes and how they might impact on design students.

Ms Geoghegan said she opposed the recommendations because of a lack of communication with students about the changes but noted communication "had improved vastly" since the senate meeting.

allison.rudd@odt.co.nz

Profits

There is often a lot of focus on "profits" made by universities. But in reality, the university can't spend more money than it receives. This means it makes a "profit", but it might be better to think of it as a (small) surplus. Together, these surpluses can either cover years that the university either makes a loss, or the surpluses can be saved to fund new buildings or other developments. Thus, the university isn't in the business of making as much profit as possible, but making sure that over time it breaks even.

Robots at work

The University council appears to have a history of 'rubber-stamping' according to the wishes of the vice-chancellor. It certainly was the norm during Graham Fogelberg's reign and this behaviour has also been quite evident in the present DCC - but that must change.

Design studies

I cannot comment on the university course. I would have thought it was one of those rather superficial courses had I not gone to a show of work by the polytech students a few years back after seeing a report with photographs in the ODT.
Far from being about making things trendy and choosing the must-have colour for the cool people's bathroom accessories, this was real work on making new things to solve a problem and making existing things work better through good design.

We have all struggled with badly designed things. One of my pet hates is equipment, electronic goods in particular, with streamlined exteriors so elegant that there is no indication of which barely visible button does what. Good design makes people's lives better. Some of it is about frivolous fashion, but what a sour bunch we would be if all we had in our lives were grim necessities?
Mason's point about being given the mushroom treatment and then told that you had been informed all along is nothing unusual.

It may be what is meant by synergistic relationship between the University and Dunedin City.... either that or it is something in the water.

Design studies death knell

As a design student, I in no way fully disagree the changes made to the department. However, I do oppose being told by Sir David Skegg that we had access to information which was clearly confidential from the beginning.

I realise by now that even a university that prides itself as being a "critic and conscience of society" is merely just a business hoping to make as much profit as possible.

Sadly this second point doesn't upset me as much as it should. If you would be kind enough to spend a minute or two I would like to know what everyone else thinks about this issue...

Thank you

Mason