The case study factory - Essay
- Source: UXDesign.cc
- Tags: #design #education
Bootcamps skip on foundational disciplines due to lack of time.
Because these bootcamps are by definition short programs, they tend to focus exclusively on the ==practical skills and methods== that a UX designer needs to find their first job. This means that such courses tend to skip what might be considered the ==foundational disciplines of digital design==, such as anthropology, philosophy, art history, and graphic design.
Short programs like bootcamps are output-focused.
Instead, these shorter programs are designed with one key output in mind: the UX/UI case study.
Time-to-job is the most important KPI for short programs.
Short design courses and bootcamps promise to place students in the industry as quickly as possible — making ==time-to-job the most important KPI== these programs are designed to meet.
Because of this KPI, schools have to standardize their curricula. This is reflected in the structured templates of their students’ case studies.
The myopic focus on shorter time-to-job metrics requires schools to ==standardize their design curricula== — a trend which is reflected in the ==structure of case studies== being produced.
Most schools provide students with a template for their case studies
This standardization makes it difficult for students to diffrentiate themselves (i.e. unique thinking, skills, point of view)
The similarities across case studies make it really hard for designers to demonstrate their unique thinking, skills, and point of view. How can you differentiate yourself when applying to a position, if case studies from other candidates look exactly the same at first glance?
Is this formulaic approach to the design process endangering young professionals’ capacity for critical thinking?