What is it about?
Drawing on interviews with graphic design practitioners and discussions in online graphic design forums, the article argues that practitioners' ambivalence towards the term 'graphic design' derives from perceptions that the term reduces the design capital that they hold within the creative process. This negatively influences the graphic designers’ perceptions of professional relationships with creative stakeholders.
Featured Image
Photo by Gensa Hub on Unsplash
Why is it important?
Practitioner ambivalence towards the term ‘graphic design’ is symptomatic of an academic gap in graphic design research. This poses challenges for practitioners, as well as for the organisations they work within, at the same time presenting opportunities for researchers to make further headway into the specific discipline and methods of both the educational practice and industry profession.
Perspectives
There's not a huge amount of research that digs into the specific practice of graphic design, and this article interrogates a previously unexplored aspect.
Dr Yaron Meron
University of Sydney
Read the Original
This page is a summary of: Terminology and Design Capital: Examining the Pedagogic Status of Graphic Design through Its Practitioners’ Perceptions of Their Job Titles, International Journal of Art & Design Education, April 2021, Wiley,
DOI: 10.1111/jade.12353.
You can read the full text:
Contributors
The following have contributed to this page
