As an educator, I believe in the need to readdress the way we use and understand theory in design education. I see theory as a way to navigate both as practitioners and as human beings by applying personal perspectives to theoretical ideas. This requires us to look outside the traditional bounds of theory that are used in graphic design education. It requires us to see theory not as an “opposite” to practice but as something each of us can incorporate and take into ourselves, not mirrored from writers or educators but part of our individual experience.
I try to endorse solidarity and encourage students to explore the prospect of disagreeing, questioning, and challenging that which is presented to them. I don’t see an educational setting as something that should aim for consensus—rather, this space provides room to metaphorically rub up against each other through disagreeing and discussing.
But what follows the ideal of being allowed to disagree is the potential of opening up for dialogue ideas that seek to silence others. Recently I encountered an example of this while teaching a workshop. At the end of the week, unknown to me and the other faculty, two students put up an alt-right flag in the studio space.
To have such an object of hatred hung in our midst was for me deeply upsetting. The event set in motion a trajectory in terms of educator and faculty intervening by discussing the situation with the students responsible and those affected by the action. But what happens when those utterances are more discreet—small snippets and comments in the classroom situation? How much should we intervene? When do you stop a conversation?