Rules and Context
In most of my classes, we spend the first 2/3 of the semester covering theory, concepts, and principles. In the last 1/3 of the semester, we move into realworld projects. I'm amazed at how consistently the final projects (new media texts, websites, etc.) seem to forget the first 2/3 of the course and just forge, relatively blindly, ahead into final designs that seem somewhat inspired, but very muddled. This, I know, is a common problem for most teachers. I've tried other variations on the structure—rubrics for the final project that clearly lay out how students need to use design rules in final projects, putting smaller projects earlier rather than a monolithic one at the end, etc. I sometimes spend a full class at the start of the final project overviewing the major conceptual/theoretical work we've covered, reminding students that the final projects are their opportunity to demonstrate that they know how to apply the concepts/theories. Not much luck. (If you're one of my students and you're reading this weblog entry, obviously you're an exception.)
At Design View, Andy Rutledge has some great examples of the interaction of context and design guidelines (he claims they're inviolable rules, but I think on rare occasions any and all of them can be broken to great effect—but that's a rare thing for a new designer to achieve, rare enough to be an accident).
Among the more counterintuitive characteristics of art and design is the fact that these endeavors are governed by rules. The rules of artistry (and therefore design) are inviolate and unchanging. If you don’t obey the rules, your results will be boring, uninspiring, uncommunicative, and less than compelling. In short: poor art or poor design.