3 ms·

First, I'm not clear how your comment is relevant to the post. Second, I think the "design" situation at Stanford would make a bit more sense to you if you too

First, I'm not clear how your comment is relevant to the post. Second, I think the "design" situation at Stanford would make a bit more sense to you if you took some time to better understand the academic field of HCI, of which design is just a small sub-area. Browsing the list of papers at last year's CHI is a good place to start [1]. Third, several HCI students are co-advised by design faculty in mechanical engineering and HCI faculty. Several HCI students also both take classes and physically work out of the d.school. CCRMA members routinely attend HCI lunches. Fourth, product design is no more relevant to the academic research that takes place in HCI than it is for the many other sub-fields of computer science for which building systems is a major aspect. [1] https://chi2016.acm.org/program/?tab=chi2016-schedule https://chi2016.acm.org/program/?tab=chi2016-schedule

tlow 10y ago
This is relevant because design is being controlled by the school of engineering and they are not managing it well. There are too many non-related groups. Yes some extraordinary students work between these silos, but it would be far better for the School of Engineering to restructure it's design groups or to let Design become a school outside of the School of Engineering. There are no formal connections between the groups. Yes, I am an example of a student who attended CCRMA, Winograd's HCI group, CDR, d.school. I graduated with 185 credits, 15 of which were basically useless nothingness because I couldn't actually enroll in the courses I was taking and professors had to admit me to their special research courses like ME 293Q. It is a disaster in terms of organizational structure and it's all due to SoE Politics. It's relevant because now the Dean seems to be someone who has an idea about the modern world and isn't focused on hard sciences like thermodynamics or materials science. Also why are you referencing academic papers? PhD programs are for producing professors, that's not the topic of discussion. We're talking about education. Last I prove conclusively that Product Design is indeed relevant and thus refute your wide, incorrect, sweeping assertion. Again I personally know a Stanford product design student who conducted academic research in HCI.[1] Please do not make such sweeping assertions when you're not actually informed. I know its appealing and sounds nice, but its totally inaccurate. Even you yourself speak of students working between the Silos. To ascribe hate onto Product Design seems like misplaced anger. [1] see http://designimpact.stanford.edu/about/faculty/ http://designimpact.stanford.edu/about/faculty/ "Sean Follmer"
- suhcistudent 10y ago
  Thank you for clarifying why this is relevant. To be clear, I am not claiming that Product Design has no place in HCI. I'm claiming that its just as relevant to many other areas of computer science as it is to HCI.

tlow 10y ago

This is relevant because design is being controlled by the school of engineering and they are not managing it well. There are too many non-related groups. Yes some extraordinary students work between these silos, but it would be far better for the School of Engineering to restructure it's design groups or to let Design become a school outside of the School of Engineering. There are no formal connections between the groups. Yes, I am an example of a student who attended CCRMA, Winograd's HCI group, CDR, d.school. I graduated with 185 credits, 15 of which were basically useless nothingness because I couldn't actually enroll in the courses I was taking and professors had to admit me to their special research courses like ME 293Q. It is a disaster in terms of organizational structure and it's all due to SoE Politics. It's relevant because now the Dean seems to be someone who has an idea about the modern world and isn't focused on hard sciences like thermodynamics or materials science. Also why are you referencing academic papers? PhD programs are for producing professors, that's not the topic of discussion. We're talking about education. Last I prove conclusively that Product Design is indeed relevant and thus refute your wide, incorrect, sweeping assertion. Again I personally know a Stanford product design student who conducted academic research in HCI.[1] Please do not make such sweeping assertions when you're not actually informed. I know its appealing and sounds nice, but its totally inaccurate. Even you yourself speak of students working between the Silos. To ascribe hate onto Product Design seems like misplaced anger. [1] see http://designimpact.stanford.edu/about/faculty/ http://designimpact.stanford.edu/about/faculty/ "Sean Follmer"

suhcistudent 10y ago
Thank you for clarifying why this is relevant. To be clear, I am not claiming that Product Design has no place in HCI. I'm claiming that its just as relevant to many other areas of computer science as it is to HCI.