NiTRO + Creative Matters

Perspectives on creative arts in higher education

Communication Design Futures: the pandemic lays bare opportunities for reflection and change

Communication Design has expanded significantly as a practice since I graduated from Art School … it has transformed into a discipline encompassing its earlier aspects of publishing, print design, branding and packaging and extended through to experiential graphic design, interaction and interface design, user-experience, service and systems design.

By Dr Neal Haslem

Communication Design has expanded significantly as a practice since I graduated from Art School with a Graphic Design major. From its late 20th Century life as Graphic Design – and prior to that Commercial Art – it has transformed into a discipline encompassing its earlier aspects of publishing, print design, branding and packaging and extended through to experiential graphic design, interaction and interface design, user-experience, service and systems design.

COVID has forced barriers to come down. It has denied educators’ authoritarian positions and made them human again.

Following early traditions the education for this practice relies upon studio pedagogy; leveraging interpersonal support and critique in an emulation of industry studio environments to bring students to transformative experiences through which they understand the history of Communication Design, its contexts, and develop their own capacity to practice and contribute to the future of the field.

The global pandemic of COVID has challenged this pedagogy and discipline, as it has challenged our disciplines and ways of living, working and educating across all sectors, throughout the world. As educators we have been thrust into digital environments which act as prophylactic barriers to the embodied shared spaces of learning that studio pedagogy championed. Lecturers are exhausted, students are disengaging, and we continue to look for ways to maintain the best aspects of Communication Design education.

The practice itself now has renewed opportunity to mature towards an authentic, interpersonal, ontological practice of making futures together; context-dependent and without the unnecessary creative genius hyperbole.

At the same time, COVID has forced barriers to come down. It has denied educators’ authoritarian positions and made them human again. We see directly into each other’s domestic spaces; we introduce our pets. Educational hierarchy is levelled as students and staff work hard together to maintain engagement and the interpersonal energy of the design studio. These conditions require us to be more relevant, more authentic, more transparent with our humanity and values. Students realise this too: it becomes all too clear that without activating authentic engagement their experience of education is in danger of diminishing in meaning. We have entered an era where the old truism of “you get out what you put in” has become very real.

Along with this, personal values – for both educators and students – have become clear and present. Sustainability and climate change are now critical issues of personal and collective import. Diversity, inclusion, indigenous sovereignty and gender equity rise in clear provocation to question traditionally assumed disciplinary knowledge systems.

The underlaying tenets of design practice become apparent as steeped in Western, colonialist power systems and techno-rationalist assumptions which are responsible for leading us into the current global crises. Suddenly different ways of being and practicing–ways of doing design and being a designer–are searched for and articulated.

This has been building for some time, at least since we passed through the mid-century “golden period” of assumed belief in the benefits of modernity and the shared aspiration towards a universalist best practice of design. COVID has, however, accelerated these changes; it has brought the issues and questions into stark relief and increased their urgency. It has challenged our assumptions on multiple fronts and simultaneously suggested ways forward. This challenges not only how we might go about the work of design education or how we might be design educators, but also challenges how we might be design students.

As the scope of Communication Design practice expanded, its ties to particular media or products loosened. While industry predominantly continues to celebrate “solutions” and “outcomes”, the practice itself now has renewed opportunity to mature towards an authentic, interpersonal, ontological practice of making futures together; context-dependent and without the unnecessary creative genius hyperbole. This is a possibility for a maturing of practice, both the practice of Communication Design as a particular design discipline, but also of Communication Design as an evolved practice per se; a way of practicing, living, knowing and having agency in the world, as demanded for by our 21st Century social and environmental issues.

A concurrent response to COVID’s destabilisation has been for the higher education institution to become reductive and highly instrumentalist in its preoccupations. Focussing on short term goals for guarantees of graduate jobs and the uncritical provision of industry’s forecasted needs. Financial uncertainty continues to lead to a discourse of scarcity, which, in turn, continues to provide an uncomplicated justification to embrace retrograde instrumentalist choices for which aspects of education to support.

In addition, it can be seen that unproblematised technology-driven solutions can take ascendance as anxiety leads us to accept off-the-shelf solutions to the complex challenges of building sustainable healthy ethical communities in a contemporary world.

We find ourselves with an amazing opportunity; to redesign design education – to redesign design – in this time of opportunity and crisis. The potential for the contribution of practice is immense. As a dematerialised, material practice Communication Design is uniquely situated to contribute to new conceptions of how we might practice in the future; to support the creation of new, diverse, shared futures together. There are also clear dangers; that we move back to an instrumentalist situating of practice, and practitioners, and deny complexity. This surely is stealing from our all possible futures. We remain on the cusp of the new, in dialogue, personally implicated and activated. It’s not a bad time to be a Communication Design educator or student.


Dr Neal Haslem is Associate Dean of the Communication Design discipline at RMIT School of Design. He is a communication designer, design educator and a practice-led researcher into communication design. He has a background in design studios and advertising agencies working across a wide range of projects including traditional graphic design, exhibition and interactive design. Neal’s research lies in the intersection of design practice, ‘community’ and the intersubjective action with which design reveals and actualises possible futures. 

More from this issue

More from this issue

The pandemic has presented design education with as many opportunities as it has challenges. With literally a day or two to prepare, most Australian tertiary education providers were hurled into a world of online learning at a scale way beyond what they ever really imagined or prepared for.

Current and future challenges around food security, climate change, migration, health, politics, and the environment, require positive, creative and ethical responses. COVID-19 has added layers of complexity to these global challenges given its precarious and diffuse nature. As the virus continues to cause disruption and harm, it serves to exemplify the need for advanced capabilities in open communication, advanced collaboration, and critical and creative thinking - core competencies of design.

“We are moving to an integrated learning model.” These exciting words have permeated discussions in the Higher Education (HE) sector most of 2020 and 2021. The incredible work of transforming teaching to accommodate COVID restrictions has disrupted many traditional teaching methods and forced educators to envisage new ways of delivering and assessing creative content.

As courses move online with the current COVID-19 lockdown in Warrane/Sydney, I reflect on the significance of material-making in design education and how the COVID pandemic has impacted on student learning experiences with mandated restrictions to specialised workshops on university campuses.

In this article we discuss models of design practice, based on three student projects from different program levels, the Bachelor of Design, the Master of Design (coursework) and the Doctor of Philosophy in Design, in the School of Art & Design at the University of New South Wales, Sydney.

In late 2019, a panel of design educators came together at the ACUADS conference to launch the Communication Design Educators Network and discuss what we saw then as big questions: Is tradition serving or stunting us? And, are the most valuable skills future design practitioners need today being taught?

Rapid change in the field of design has become a defining challenge in our role as educators. Graduates from design programs are expected to be simultaneously conceptual, material and entrepreneurial thinkers with the ability to work across disciplines.

Since the emergence of design as a profession across the post-war Northern Hemisphere in the 1950s, the role of design in fuelling economic growth has become more pronounced across the globe. There are significant nuances between nations, communities and companies’ interpretations and use of design to tackle the problems they confront, including the degree of national commitment to design-led innovation, disciplinary orientations and the rich variety of philosophies and methods.

A number of contributions to this edition of NiTRO reflect on the state of design education: from signature pedagogies such as dialogue, critique and the studio translated for online contexts, and relational shifts between teachers and students; to design’s role away from an emphasis on creative solutions and outputs to matters of process and ways of doing.

Dominated by engineering constraints, the potential for human centered design to inform the design of extreme, isolated environments such as submarines, Antarctica and even off world habitation has been limited. Driven by economic pressures and profession cultures fields such as ship building rarely include human factors in their design.

The first time we met was 22 years ago at an information session on the remote delivery of courses convened in Melbourne, for the university where I then worked. She enrolled, so the second time we met was the first weekend of that remote delivery, a Master of Arts class in journalism held in Melbourne. She was a young lawyer, head hunted by a top firm in Australia.