Neuro-physiology of Design Education
Krishnesh S. Mehta
Abstract:
Design is a complex discipline; if at all one can call it a discipline. There are as many
definitions of Design in this world as the number of Designers. Probably, the only
thing that all designers will ever unanimously agree to is that there is no one
definition for design. Unlike most other disciplines, design does not seem to have a
strong basis or foundations or formative principles or fundamental knowledgebase
that can be called its own. Often, there appears to be no universally accepted uniform
end purpose for all designing. With no one fundamental theory or sets of theories,
virtually no baseline, the sequential evolution of new principles and theories –new
body of knowledge, as explicitly observed in other disciplines, is usually found either
tangibly missing or at most implicit in the field of design. Moreover, the pure and
applied branching of knowledge as found in the majority of other disciplines is
virtually non-existent or at best indistinguishable. Under all the above circumstances,
design has come to be seen as a predominantly subjective and intuitive discipline.
Besides, Design is a dependent discipline. It derives and enriches by a meaningful,
synergetic and a systemic integration and synthesis of the principles and knowledge
bases of, ideally, all the varied disciplines in existence. Yet, Design is at the core of
all human subsistence. To use an analogy, Design is more like a string that brings a
meaningful systemic synthesis of all the varied flowers to form a dazzling, delightful
garland. And like the string of a garland, it is too fundamental and invisible to be seen
as a distinct discipline with a clear identity. Though, that is changing now.
Design can be seen as a discipline that is a synthesis of all disciplines, perhaps the
only truly trans-disciplinary discipline. The above necessitates that the nature and the
way in which design education is imparted has to be different. While in most other
disciplines, education is all about conveying the conclusions and convictions of the
teacher to the taught, design education is about instilling the very processes and
methodology of arriving at conclusions and convictions. Physiologically, it is about
activating similar neural connections in the taught. It is about teaching to fish rather
than giving a fish. Based on the latest understanding of the neuro-physiology of the
brain and its functions and empirical studies carried out by the author, this paper
identifies the neuro-physiology of a few key proficiencies like systems thinking,
visual imagination, etc. necessary to be mastered by any design student and elicits
educational interventions for the same. The paper also suggests an approach to design
foundations and touches upon the need to have a distinct pure design and applied
design branches manned by, coining new terminology, ‘designtists’ and ‘designeers’
respectively with roles analogous to what scientists and engineers have in the field of
science and technology.
Keywords: Design, Education, Learning, Neurophysiology, Neural connections
Introduction:
Ever wondered why most designers in spite of being educated at the best of schools
are not able to achieve much professionally while quite often those who never had any
formal, or at best minimal (or in a lowest rated school or in one of intellectual,
infrastructural and all other penury), education in design come to be recognized as all
time greats. These exceptions, even if few, spurs a thought that, maybe, it is not
necessarily always the imparting and the instructional infrastructure and architecture
but the learning and grasping (something happening within the individual) that is
more important for education and that the latter may happen with or without any
structured or express/official coaching. While this may be observed in all professions
and disciplines, it may be found to be more widespread in the design and related
areas. The beginnings of this paper stem from a curiosity to understand and explore
on what is it that is happening within the individual, why this may be so, whether this
can be transferred, and then what, if at all, is the role of training/education. Of course,
the full research caters to and is pertinent for all education -all different formats,
disciplines and age groups, from the newborn to the most elderly, and the findings are
applicable with appropriate modifications (that are also a part of this full research) to
all disciplines, but for the purpose of this paper design and design education will
remain the main focus.
This quest actually began years back as one of the many collateral interests in trying
to understand and learn the formative principles of design and design education. This
probe, more than anything else, very much began out of personal inquisitiveness, with
one finding leading to the other but lacking in any presentably documented research
rigour. Nonetheless it is not devoid of method, only that the findings presented here
may not be supported by much author generated documental evidence. In that sense
this paper may be termed empirical and epistemological, and seem speculative. In a
way it is indeed so. That does not mean it is baseless. It is founded on what can be
called extrapolative speculation based on intuitive insights informed, culled and
developed from a cross disciplinary synergistic synthesis of the latest findings (mainly
post 2000 AD) of various disciplines like neuroscience, physics, cognitive neuropsychology, neurology, neurobiology, neurophysiology, etc. and the observed,
experimental and experiential studies carried out by the author in the field of
education. It is by no means an individualist approach, except that it is an attempt at
linking the findings in the field of neuroscience to the field of education, and since
this association is not seen too often it may apparently be seen as either radical and
premature or irrelevant. What and how much then, is the significance and utility of
such a study and, therefore, this paper? The refuge for this can be taken in what the
great scientist and the father of wave mechanics, who in spite of being a physicist
wrote a speculative book on biology, ‘What is Life’, mentions in the preface [1] “We
have inherited from our forefathers the keen longing for unified, all embracing
knowledge. The very name given to the highest institutions of learning reminds us,
that from antiquity and throughout many centuries the UNIVERSAL aspect has been
the only one to be given full credit. But the spread, both in width and depth, of the
multifarious branches of knowledge during the last hundred odd years has confronted
us with a queer dilemma. We feel clearly that we are only now beginning to acquire
reliable material for welding together the sum total of all that is known into a
WHOLE; but, on the other hand, it has become next to impossible for a single mind
fully to command more than a specialized portion of it.
I can see no other escape from this dilemma (lest our true aim be lost forever) than
that some of us should venture to embark on a synthesis of facts and theories, with
second hand and incomplete knowledge of some of them –and at a risk of making
fools of ourselves”. (Emphasis added). Further the utility of such an endeavour, no
matter how foolish it may seem or turn out to be, has been highlighted by the Nobel
laureate James Watson in his book DNA: The Secret of Life [2] “My change of heart
was inspired not by an unforgettable teacher but a little book that appeared in 1944,
What is Life?...That a great physicist had taken the time to write about biology caught
my fancy.”, and further “Schrödinger’s book was tremendously influential. Many of
those who would become major players in Act 1 of molecular biology’s great drama,
including Francis Crick (a former physicist himself), had, like me, read ‘What is
Life?’ and been impressed.” That such works can have immense value has been amply
illustrated by the living examples of the both of them , James Watson and Francis
Crick, together winning the Nobel prize by being inspired by the insightful
perceptions of a physicist looking at biology. Cross-disciplinary or trans-disciplinary
interaction generally leads to exchange of fresh perspectives and insights that are by
and large enriching for all those participating. Evolutionarily, hasn’t cross breeding
always proved to be more beneficial than inbreeding? This paper dares to attempt to
do something similar with full awareness of its inherent and imminent risk.
In the light of the preceding, this study may be seen as a pilot study and the paper may
also be looked upon as provocative -to motivate all interested researchers from all the
various relevant fields to come together and devote their time and efforts, all the
influential to get the PETs, fMRIs, fDOTs, and the like to look at brains from this
angle, and all the rich to provide funds to do more elaborate and authoritative
investigation on the same.
The basic purpose of this paper is to present the latest understanding of how the brain
learns and gets ‘educated’ and how that can be used to develop the theory for the
neuro-physiologic model of design education. This paper also attempts to list, based
on empirical findings, the central ‘soft’ proficiencies indispensable to be developed in
those desirous of learning design, more so in the present socio-cultural and economic
context, and discuss the probable neurophysiology associated with each of them and
put forth some of the studies that demonstrate how this physiology could be attained
and argues as to how altering/creating the required brain wiring can help make design
education more effective and efficient. Just as it is essential to stretch the balloon
from all sides before it can be blown into effectively and efficiently, so also enabling
the acquisition of the requisite neural connections prior to imparting design will help
achieve more effectual education, especially design education, that tangibly brings
about a truly transformational learning and wisdom in the taught.
Physiology of Learning:
Education should, ideally, lead to learning and knowledge, then to experience and
finally to wisdom. Knowledge is filtered and usable information. Experience is the
ability to apply this knowledge. Wisdom is the ability to apply the knowledge most
appropriately with the full consciousness and awareness and/or the anticipation of the
consequences. That it may not always do so or that learning may happen without
education has already been mentioned earlier. Understanding the basic physiology of
learning and education may offer some comprehension. Neurobiologists [3] define
knowledge as structured bodies of information possessed by the organism about the
world, and capable of setting the organism’s reactions to the world. (The ‘world’
means both the external milieu and the internal states of the organism, and the
‘organism’ means, specifically, the nervous system.). Further, they define learning as
an experience dependent generation of enduring internal representations, and/or
experience dependent lasting modification in such representations. (‘Enduring’ and
‘lasting’ mean at least a few seconds, but in most cases much longer, and in some
cases up to a lifetime). ‘Internal representations’ are defined as neuronally encoded
structured versions of the world which could potentially guide behaviour. Two other
things crucial for learning and education are memory and retrieval. ‘Memory’ is the
retention of experience-dependent internal representations over time. ‘Retrieval’ is
the use of memory in neuronal and behavioural operations. Therefore, it can be said
that any learning induces a specific alteration in the physiology of the brain, or the
brain state, that may in turn affect behaviour. Neurobiologically speaking,
behavioural states correspond to brain states. Any and every behaviour has and is
driven by a distinct physiology in the brain. Moreover, neurobiologists assume that
the hardware properties of the system are vital and valuable for discerning its function
and output. In other words, any particular behaviour can be linked to the brain state or
the neurophysiology of the brain which in turn has been derived from the learning.
This in turn may have resulted from education in some formal sense or may have been
imbibed through a series of favourable coincidences/accidents leading to the held
physiology in the brain. Thus, it emerges that learning is all about appropriately
activating and developing the desired kind of structures/connections in the brain.
The main purpose of education is, ideally, to make learning happen. The intention of
all learning is to bring about a change and positive transformation in the existing state
of being –perceptions, skills, thoughts, emotions, behaviour –all developing the
desired internal representations -collectively termed ‘sensibilities’. All new
knowledge is filtered and altered based on the prior or existing sensibilities and so on
till a new sensibility or learning, which progressively affects and revises the
behaviour is accomplished. All learning can be basically looked upon as the attaining
of the requisitely derived perceptions and skills –the sensibilities that are acquired
consciously/unconsciously with or without any formal and structured teaching.
Physiologically speaking, these sensibilities are dependent on the nature and type and
the quality and quantity of neural connections in the brain, and optimal brain
structure (like prefrontal cortex, basal ganglia, etc.) activity. This means that for a
good learning to ensue all that is required is a set of smart and sharp mechanisms and
instrument/s that help in achieving the desired perceptions and skills –the desired
type, quality and quantity of the neural connections. For humans, these instruments
happen to be all the various [4] 35 plus sensory receptors and the apparatus that
processes all the sensory data –the brain. The mechanisms then are the mechanisms
happening in the brain and the nervous system.
Any long term, behaviour altering and significant learning is a four step journey from
unconscious unknown to the unconscious known. The former is a state of ignorance
and the latter of knowledge mastery or wisdom that capacitates effortless and
automatic – intuitive behaviour and responding. The steps are:
1) Unconscious unknown
2) Conscious unknown
3) Conscious known
4) Unconscious known
There is no effort required in the first and the last steps. The second and the third steps
require maximum effort and may require some external help in form of education or
training. Movement from the first to the last happens through learning and awareness
that might result either from direct education/training and/or what can be called a
series of favourable coincidences/accidents, occurring in presence or absence, partial
or full, of any formal imparting. A closer look a the lives of the persons who excel in
their fields without any formal education in the same will definitely show that they
had indeed achieved through some apposite concurrence the preferred and requisite
type of neural connections for their area of work. They had developed the right
attitude that enabled them to gain a high level of perceptivity for their field that
allowed them to build the exact kind of neural connections leading to the relevant
sensitivities and sensibilities. This correct attitude, as evidenced by umpteen
biographies and autobiographies, often develops as a result of scarcity, penury,
survival struggle, near death experience, an inspiration, a dream, words from someone
special, etc. that makes the person realize the value of life and work, almost
instantaneously modifying their sensibilities and rendering them more perceptive. In
effect, physiologically, what has happened, when such a phase occurs, is that the brain
has been freed of prior debilitating sensibilities, preconceptions and inhibitions and
has been rendered more plastic and available for new neural connections to be made.
The increased perceptivity then helps in acquiring the desired physiology. Thus,
attitude is also a very important factor that is essential for bringing about the aspired
brain physiology and, therefore, learning. According to research, attitude also plays a
major role in memory formation and retention, as well.
The physiology of learning, as derived from the latest neurophysiologic research,
could be explained in simplified form as follows. Any and every exposure to the
sensory stimulus/stimuli, external or internal, undergone by an individual definitely
leads to some neuronal activity in the brain of that individual. Depending on the
nature and strength of these stimuli and the ongoing brain activity (prior sensibilities),
certain particular sets of neurons in the brain fire together as a result. As per the latest
understanding of these processes, this simultaneous firing of the neurons can happen
either linearly/serially, associatively or synchronistically and in any permutation –any
one at a time, or any two or all three in concert. The serial neural connections give
rise to rational and analytical and sequential cause-effect, rule bound thinking more
generally referred to as IQ. The associative connections give rise to systemic,
emotional and empathic, habit-bound, pattern-recognizing emotive thinking nowadays
referred to as EQ or emotional intelligence. Synchronistic neural connections give rise
to creative, intuitive, value forming, moral, holistic, insightful, ethical, decisional,
discriminative, visionary, creatively spontaneous, more transcendental thinking –often
called ‘unitive’ thinking- processes and capabilities referred to as SQ or Spiritual
Intelligence [derived from 13]. One more aspect of brain physiology pertinent to
learning is that each time a given set of neurons fire together, it becomes more likely
for them to fire together in future. As is said, “Neurons that fire together wire
together”. When these connections are repetitively activated, they form ever stronger
links that bind them into a single unit. When this binding is strong and coherent
enough it leads to learning of the unconscious known type leading to wisdom. The
strength of the neural bonding is a direct function of the amount of active cognition,
involvement and the impact-fullness of the experience –the depth of emotion, extent
of surprise, etc. Thus, physiologically, the nature and type of neural connections, IQ,
EQ or SQ or any combination thereof, and the quality and quantity of the neural
connections and the qualitative and quantitative simultaneity of neural firing giving
rise to specific sensibilities , bestowing what can be called WQ –wisdom intelligence,
constitutes learning. Physiologically, WQ is the executive ability of the brain to use
IQ, EQ or SQ, either individually or in any most apt mix, with full consciousness and
awareness coming from the optimal activity in the frontal cortex and the frontal
temporal lobe regions of the brain. This, then, is what all education should strive to
achieve.
Over and above the preceding, education is also about awakening the hidden
potential, or fine tuning the existing sensibilities, for a given topic in the taught.
Physiologically, this only means that the student already has some or all requisite
neural connections. All that is required is to either activate them or to strengthen
them. When we say some persons have a natural talent for something, it only means
that either consciously or unconsciously, they had been exposed to situations and
circumstances that led to their developing the required neural connections. Thus, any
particular sensibility or learning displayed by any individual is and has to be based on
the existence of the essential physiology for the same. Education either unveils or
facilitates the creation of this desired physiology.
Further, one unsaid aim of all education is to see that, ideally, all the students get
equally talented and adept in the areas taught. But, in reality, it is known that it is not
always so. Everyone achieves differing levels of expertise, though all are exposed to
the same inputs. This happens, as in the present non-neurophysiologic model of
education, everyone makes sense of these inputs within the limits of their existing
sensibilities and hence are able to generate, or otherwise, the neural capabilities only
to that extent. Thus, these students neither have same level of understanding nor the
equivalent expression ability, neither equal base nor the similar aptitude and
adroitness to express and respond. In contrast, the neurophysiologic mode of
imparting can enable more students to attain the similar neural wiring and brain
structure activation capacitating the attainment of a common level of neural expertise
or the foundation and talent, putting them all at an equal pedestal. Of course, it does
not mean that this creates clones, or programmed robots, of all students and it does
not take away the variety and richness that can come from the disparities and
divergences. Only that it helps achieve an even playing field on which the diversity,
multiplicity and creativity can then thrive and reach a new high. This is made possible
by the fact that, in this case, the existing sensibilities come into play only in
responding and expression and not in grasping. This makes education more uniformly
effective among all students. Thereby enabling expansion of their individual and
collective standards of accomplishments and in this manner help evolve and elevate
the discipline as well.
Changing demands on Design and Design Education in the new economy:
Design in the new economy is becoming more business savvy. Or rather, of late, the
industry has started realizing the importance of Design. Worldwide, design had
largely been seen by the industry as having the art value or the cosmetic and gimmick
value. However, the utility value and the humane value of design is just now being
recognized and understood. The business world is still grappling with the innovative
and strategic value of design. This turnaround has come about as a part of the
realization that, ultimately, at the end of the day, all activities, scientific, artistic,
business or otherwise, must be done to improve the quality of life and not be
detrimental for the same. No one entity can exist in isolation of the other and no one
unit can prosper without the prosperity of all of the others. Human and all life, and
human values must be protected at all costs if the progress has to be of any lasting and
evolutionary value. The fallacies of human greed and materialism has been amply
made clear in this post 9/11 era. In fact, more and more businesses are now looking at
making themselves human centered. The business people have now started talking
about love, spirituality, emotion, sensuality, etc. as opposed to only gains (ROI),
money and all things material just a few years ago. Some of the more evolved
businessmen believe what Kevin Roberts, CEO Worldwide of Saatchi and Saatchi,
well summarizes in his book ‘Lovemarks: the future beyond brands’ [5] “The
idealism of Love is the new realism of business. By building Respect and inspiring
Love, business can move the world”. Of course, knowing the business behaviour in
the past, while this noble view may seem to be one more fad for businesspeople and
one more of their many ways of this time ‘humanly’ making the wallets of their
consumers lighter, it will have to, sooner or later, be out of real need, for otherwise
the very survival of humankind and, therefore business, is in jeopardy. Design too has
added its bit to this view by encouraging new (old wine in a new bottle –hasn’t design
always followed systems approach) design thinking like universal design, inclusive
design, green design, sustainable design, etc. However, even without these buzz
words, design has always been more system oriented, emotional and humanizing. And
it is this quality that is making design so popular in the new millennium. It is in this
context that design is fast becoming accepted and is being embraced all over. And it is
in this backdrop that the roles and responsibilities of the designers are becoming
crucial and hence the demands on Design education too. Design education, today, as
always, has to produce designers who are highly sensitized in order to be able to
design with and for senses and sensibilities. Hence, designers have to first sense and
experience before they can make others feel and perceive. Design educators, all the
more so.
Besides, Design is a dependent discipline. It derives and enriches by drawing from all
the other disciplines. Unlike most other disciplines, it does not have foundational or
formative basis that can be called its own. Though, this need not and should not
remain so. Most such are drawn from all the various disciplines. And that is desirable
too, as mentioned by Donald Anderson [6] “While it is true that we all must learn to
see, many people in the sciences learn to see better than do artists. For many of those
not wholly engaged in a world of symbols, fine visual discrimination is a prerequisite.
Gifted astronomers can resolve more detail than photographic apparatus. Those of us
who are engaged in design fields can be helped to grasp the fundamentals of natural
structure with the aid of those who are most closely associated with its study.” Very
few other disciplines need do this and there lies the beauty and uniqueness of design
as a discipline. If there is anything that is exclusive to Design, it is its ability to handle
width and yet reach a distinct depth. It has a knack of forming its own foundations by
integrating and synthesizing the formative principles of all the various bodies of
knowledge in existence today. The power of Design is founded on it being transdisciplinary. This is well said by Evan Schwartz [7], “Inventors often need to go
beyond the area of their training or past experience and extend themselves into new
realms. They need to sense an opportunity to bridge two industries, two intellectual
domains, or two different worlds. They need to combine conceptual models that have
never been put together before. They need to cross or transcend boundaries.” While
other disciplines have to be trans-disciplinary for individual and collective enrichment
but need not be incomplete without it, the very fulfillment of design comes from
being trans-disciplinary. Further [8], “a designer has to design a product such that the
product by itself communicates the designer’s desired intent to enable the user to
perceive and use the product as intended, in the process meeting the user’s expected
sensibilities. And, design has to be responsible. It has to be environment friendly,
optimal on resources (added), ethical and cares for the safety, ease of use, security,
comfort and pleasure of the user. It has to meet the requirements of the elderly, the
less abled, women, men, kids, youth, teenagers, and so on. It has to help avert crime
and foster peace. It has to simplify and humanize technology. It has to convey all this
and much more.” In this respect, design education is different and more challenging.
It has to cover both breadth and profundity; it has to give a grasping power and the
wisdom that enables the student to extract the most appropriate solution for the given
problem. It has to incorporate systems thinking and a more than ordinary
understanding and concern for the living beings, and all of nature, their emotions and
well being.
While on the topic Design evolution, a small digression on a passing thought may not
be too much out of place. Design, like Science, penetrates very deeply into our lives.
It is at the very core of human subsistence. Yet, because of various factors including
its subjective nature and lack of explicit foundational basis, Design is a complex
discipline. Design education is even more so. Hence, the mental set-up and skill set
required of a designer is very much different from that of a design educator. A
designer may not be equipped or interested in the development and evolution of
design pedagogy and design as a body of knowledge, especially the generation and
evolution of design foundations and formative principles –the design equivalents of
the theorems and theories of the sciences. While a designer has to be more application
oriented, a design educator has to be more academic and pedagogic and yet have
application propensity and capability. In that sense design educator is a designer plus
a mentor and has to be a super set of the two. Bauhaus faculty, Johannes Itten said as
early as the 1960s [9], “There is no field of human activity in which talent plays so
decisive a role as in education. Only the talented educator, that is a person with a flair
for education, will respect and protect in a child the indescribable miracle of his or her
humanity. Respect for the human being is the beginning and end of all education.
Education is a bold venture – particularly in the arts, because it involves the creative
spirit of man. Knowledge of human nature – intuitive knowledge of human nature –
appears to me to be a gift essential to the true educator, who needs to recognize and be
able to develop the natural talents and temperaments of those in his charge.”
Physiologically, s/he must have the requisite neural connections and the panache to
impart in such a way that it generates analogous neural wiring and brain activity in the
taught. That probably sets at rest the possible debate on whether a design educator has
to be a practitioner only, or only an academic or a bit of both. Hence, to bring about
more focus and better concentration of efforts and thereby a more systematic and
methodical development of Design as a discipline in its pure and applied forms,
would it not be more beneficial to have a distinct pure design and applied design
branches manned by, coining new terminology, ‘designtists’ and ‘designeers’
respectively with roles akin to what scientists and engineers have in the field of
science and technology? The ‘designtists’ becoming the design knowledge and
wisdom creators and imparters and the ‘designeers’ becoming the application wizards
and generators and imparters of best practices and application processes and methods.
Needless to mention, this distinction is only for the purposes of focus and both must
talk to each other and both are responsible for the Design community at large. Of
course, occasional role reversals and overlaps may happen and are welcome, but by
and large this differentiation may help a more effective and efficient growth for the
Design discipline. The utility of such demarcation has been amply demonstrated by
the example of the sciences.
Ingredients of Design Education:
Design, Science and Technology, Management and Art are some of the most
important disciplines affecting our lives every moment of every day. All seem to be
very different in approach, method and what they do, but effectively all seem to have
the same quest –that of improving the quality of life. While Design and Art may be
termed ‘soft’ disciplines driven by human emotions and feelings and associative
thinking (primarily EQ), Science and technology may be termed the ‘hard’ type
driven purely by logic and linear thinking (mainly IQ). Management is in between the
hard and soft (ideally EQ-IQ) tending towards soft (as it should!). Design is often
supplemented and enhanced by drawing from the convergence of the rest.
It is important to define a discipline to be able to better understand it and the
constituents necessary for imparting the same. But it is difficult to define design.
There can be as many definitions of Design as the total number of designers. Probably
the other way of getting clarity about any discipline is by looking at what it does.
What does each do? Science explains the causes of the observed phenomenon and
develops the cause and effect relationships. Management enables achievement of any
goals most effectively and efficiently. Art is about insightful and emotion evoking self
expression. What does design do? Design synergistically synthesizes and integrates
all relevant (for the given design problem) knowledge/wisdom in order to ‘optimize’,
‘contextualize’, ‘systematize’, ‘harmonize’, ‘humanize’, ‘emotionalize’, ‘sensualize’,
‘intuitivise’, and ‘intimatize’ as intended (by the designer), the production and the
use/consumption and experiencing (by the consumer) of any product, service or any
design. Socio-culturally and economically, if design has to play an emancipative and
transcendental role then the word ‘spiritualize’ could also be added to the above list.
Here spiritualize means to influence a more ethical and responsible behaviour. In fact,
design collates and converges all the learning of the various disciplines into a
synthesized and integrated holistic whole so as to encompass all the possible
perspectives to bring about a solution that is most simplified and common-sensory to
almost all.
Design is more often seen as material skills based discipline, much like the arts and
crafts. However, there should be, preferably, a balance of proficiency between the
mind and the hands, the tangible and the intangible, more so in the present context,
when it is increasingly becoming a strategic and thought led discipline. Especially,
that’s how the business world would like to accept design. Most design schools do a
very good job of distinctively imparting the corporeal aspects but the ethereal ones are
either missed or passed on indirectly or very subtly, often left to the students to pick
them up. Modern understanding of learning emphasizes that the ‘mind’ skills are
more important for a better and efficient grasping of ‘hand’ skills. And this same
thought is reverberated, albeit in different words, by Itten in the past [10],
“Imagination and creative ability must first of all be liberated and strengthened. Once
this has been achieved, technical and practical demands and finally commercial
considerations may be introduced. Young people who begin with market research and
practical and technical work seldom feel encouraged to search for something new. If
new ideas are to assume artistic form, physical, sensual, spiritual, and intellectual
forces and abilities must all be equally available and act in concert. This realization
largely determined the subjects and methods of my teaching at Bauhaus. It was
essential to build up the individual student as a well integrated creative person.” Even
when teaching is done at the tangible and conscious levels, the real learning is
happening unconsciously and intangibly at the neuro-physiologic planes. As per
recent research [11], almost 95% of all cognition is unconscious. This adds to the
complexity of teaching and therefore a need for education methodology that directly
addresses the 95% unconscious, and, therefore, this proposed neurophysiologic
model. For example, one way to learn singing is to practice till full expertise is
achieved. Essentially, what the practice is indirectly achieving is control on breathing,
abdominal, vocal chord and other related muscles and body parts. If the control of
these muscles and body parts could be directly achieved beforehand, through specific
breathing exercises, etc., then the singing can be learnt much faster and more
effectively. This applies to drawing, too. Activating the fine motor neuron and
perception areas of the brain makes learning drawing speedier and effectual. Same is
valid for all learning, specifically design, as is being showcased here.
Based on the concepts presented so far from the latest literature in the field and based
on the author’s empirical studies as explained later in this paper, the key intangible
ingredients of Design education can be listed as Heightened Sensitivity and
Perceptibility, Highly evolved Sensibilities, Systems, Associative and Unitive
thinking (IQ, IQ+EQ, SQ), Multiple Perspectives and Cognitive Flexibility, Creativity
(spontaneous creativity and creative spontaneity), Very good Visual (in fact all
sensory- Multi-sensory) Imagination, Objective subjectivity (ability to objectively
evaluate their own ideas without falling into ‘my baby syndrome’), Discriminative
and decisional abilities, Intuitive insight and foresight, Multi-layering and Multitasking ability, Teaming skills, ability to deal with ambiguity and self-reliance and
self initiative. Some of these are inter-related. Modern neuro-physiological research
has been able to identify some characteristic brain goings-on necessary for each of
these and also how those could be activated or optimized, transferred and taught.
Most of the above ‘skills’ are what need to be manifestly and explicitly imparted but
they are rarely offered directly, perhaps due to lack of unambiguous methodology and
need perception for the same, and it is often picked up (or otherwise and hence all
students going through the same course do not become equally talented) by the
student while going through the courses and structured ‘education’. And since they
are ‘picked up’ indirectly, even a person without a formal education can ‘pick’ them
up. This explains the increased incidences of great designers and creative
professionals not being formally trained. In effect, these people have learned to learn,
and they are not bound and limited by the ‘rules’ of structured education. They have
achieved the right sensitivities and sensibilities to make sense of the things on their
own.
Creativity is considered to be a very important ingredient for Design. Designers call
themselves ‘creative’ but worldwide there are hardly any design schools that
specifically offer a course on creativity as a part of their regular curriculum. Same is
the case with Sensitivity, Sensibilities, Perceptibility and Associative and Unitive
thinking, et al. Often drawing skills are equated as visual imagination and
visualization skills, but they are actually only visual representation skills. It does not
develop imagination; it can help represent it only. Same with the modern technologies
like Virtual Reality, etc. And in any case in today’s context it has to be not only visual
imagination, it has to be full Multi-sensory and Cross-sensory imagination.
Is it at all possible to impart all of this? Well, yes. If some people have acquired this
then definitely it can be attained by others. Factually, what these people have
achieved is the relevant and requisite neural wiring and brain activation. And this can
be transferred and taught, but the approach and the process has to be different, and
therefore this paper that tries to propose a neurophysiology based model for
education. In today’s highly informed world, any information is just a click away and
in that context just the present ways of instruction will not suffice. The above
necessitates that the nature and the way in which design education is imparted has to
be special. It is because of this, then, the need to invoke the neurophysiology and the
modern understanding of the brain, so that the education can be made more effective
and efficient. This demands developing newer methods of teaching design that help
build up the desired neural connections as per the key ingredients needed, like some
mentioned later. This pedagogy is extremely relevant for all education, but that will
be out of context for the intent of this paper. While in most other disciplines,
education is all about conveying the conclusions and convictions of the teacher to the
taught, design education is about instilling the very processes and methodology of
arriving at those or similar conclusions and convictions. This is so because in design
and to some extent in management, the tasks, problems and areas of work keep
changing from project to project unlike elsewhere, like a cardiologist will keep
working with the heart for the rest of the life, a civil engineer keep doing civil
engineering and so on. Physiologically, it is about activating similar brain structures
and neural connections in the taught so that they are rendered capable to suitably
respond to any situation, pre-identifiable or otherwise. Of course, it should be made
clear here that this similarity does not lead to all students becoming a carbon copy of
the teacher or clones of each other, leaving no room for individual creative
expression. What are being transferred are the experience and the abilities to respond
to situations and not the responses themselves. Thereby, help generate spontaneous
creativity and intuition.
Neuro-physiology of Design Education:
Presented here is the brain physiology pertinent for the above key ingredients derived
and partially validated from experiments and empirical research carried out by the
author and supported by written evidence [12] and some extrapolative speculation.
These are offered without getting into the technicalities and detailed explanations that
could be obtained from the references. Design is primarily and idyllically a whole
brain activity. A designer with full brain activity is guaranteed for full success.
Direct imparting of the key ingredients can be achieved by aiming to affect the related
brain activity and neural connections in the taught. Systems, associative and unitive
thinking can be achieved by having more associative neural connections (EQ) along
with as much possible of simultaneous firing (SQ) of different neural networks and
regions. For example, often, design educators might have experienced, that students
excel in each of the individual courses like color, ergonomics, product graphics, form,
etc. but when it comes to integrated application of all of them in a complete design
project for a particular product, they are not able to do well. This happens as all the
individual courses have developed sufficient serial connections separately for each of
them, but at the time of undergoing the courses because the simultaneity of neural
firing was missing the relevant associative neural connections were not made. And, in
fact, habit also plays an important role here. Most of the schools at 10+2 level all over
the world only cater to developing serial neural connections (IQ) and hardly ever any
noticeably associative or synchronistic ones. So the students even when in a design
school continue to connect linearly, by the force of their twelve year old habit. The
neuro-physiologic way to overcome this is to keep making the relevant associations at
each stage.
Creativity, creative spontaneity and sensibilities can be achieved by building
synchronistic neural connections [13] and an optimally active frontal cortex and
temporal lobes in the brain [12]. Multiple Perspectives and Cognitive Flexibility come
from optimal activity in the Cingulate system as also the ability to cooperate and team
up. Ability to deal with ambiguity and uncertainty and the discriminative and
decisional facility comes from the entire prefrontal cortex. Intuitive insight and
foresight, systems thinking, evolved sensibilities and ethics, creating values, amplified
awareness, etc. comes from increased capability for synchronistic oscillations and
associative connections (SQ+EQ) and basal ganglia activity. As per the pioneer of
Emotional Intelligence, Daniel Goleman, [14] “Gut feeling, in fact, has gained new
scientific respect because of recent discoveries about implicit learning – that is, the
lessons in life we pick up without being aware that we are learning them”. In fact
intuition is not hunch. All the varied knowledge known to a person is stored in
different parts of that person’s brain. Generally, it is difficult to access all the different
areas of the brain at one time if they had not been associatively or synchronistically
fired at the time of data entry. Therefore, this calls for developing special methods for
teaching and retrieving the same, such that associative and synchronistic neural firing
is achieved. However, SQ allows simultaneously accessing all the various locations of
knowledge storage, irrespective of the way data was stored and processing it in
parallel generates an output that seems like a hunch. But, actually it is based on full
but unconscious process and dispensation. Multi-sensory imagination and
visualization is accomplished through parietal lobe along with limbic activation and
the fullness of whole cortical activation including the temporal lobes. Self reliance,
self-monitoring and supervision and initiative are very important for any education
but all the more so for design and creative studies. These come from optimal
activation of the pre-frontal cortex and the basal ganglia structures in the brain.
Progressive relaxation and meditation has been found to be highly useful for
activating the frontal lobes and the parietal lobes. These methods also help in
developing the multitasking, multi-layering and analytical skills through inducing a
state of relaxed alertness leading to a high level of presence of mind and creativity.
The latest scientific evidence suggests that our brains are plastic at any age and that
the above neurophysiologic modifications and hence the learning can be achieved at
any time provided appropriate steps are taken to bring about the desired changes. This
again highlights the need for considering the neurophysiologic approach in education.
The study:
This paper is based on the many empirical studies undertaken over the period of last
one year or so. However, as mentioned before, they have been carried out with some
aspects of the full research methodology, like meticulous documentation, control
group, etc. either lacking or not strictly adhered to. Nonetheless they can act as
indicative and pilot studies. Ideally, this study would be more emphatic if done using
non invasive active brain imaging techniques like the fMRI (functional Magnetic
Resonance Imaging) or fDOT (Functional Diffuse Optical Tomography) and the like.
Another cheaper but less effective technique is to use RFI ((Resonant Frequency
Imaging). In the absence of the access to the above, to study brain and behaviour
alterations, a brain structure activity depicting questionnaire developed by Dr. Daniel
Amen [12] based on thousands of SPECT (Single Photon Emission Computed
Tomography) studies carried out by him was used. Some of the questions as also the
mode of administering and evaluating were modified, after suitable validation. Since
this questionnaire is based on the direct correlation with SPECT imaging, it can act as
an approximate replacement for brain imaging. Volunteers, mainly design students
from various disciplines at the National Institute of Design, India, ranging in group
strengths from 5-10 were selected using random sampling. The classmates and batchmates not participating formed what could be considered the control group. The
duration of testing varied from 7 days to a few months depending on the availability
and willingness to continue practicing the prescribed interventions. One group of
seven is being monitored for the last ten months. The volunteers were made to
respond to the above mentioned questionnaire at the start of the study and then at the
end and the differences in the two responses were noted based on which the success
or otherwise of the given intervention was established. The outcome was also
correlated with the performance of the volunteers in their regular academic courses
and the perceptions of the students themselves and their peers and faculty.
The key ingredients of Design education have been obtained by following definite
empirical and experimental methodologies carried out over the period of 6-8 years
and as many batches of design students. These included, in depth interviews of
students and practicing designers and academicians, observing the qualities of
students who performed consistently well in their studies and that of those who did
not, as also testing certain qualities, like for e.g. visual/multi-sensory imagination,
intuition, etc. by giving specific exercises to be completed in specific time limits and
then evaluating the outcomes and from there extract the abilities, or the lack thereof,
that led to the particular type of outputs. Besides, techniques those help dig out the
unconscious mind and potentials like the Zaltman Metaphor Elicitation Technique
(ZMAT) [11] and similar others with appropriate remodelling were also used.
The neurophysiology altering mediations were administered in form of theory as well
as practical and experimental formats. Most interventions were based on teaching
methods that achieved more neuron impacting while some of them were proprietarily
developed specific procedures based on the combination of the modern technologies
like sound/light and multi-sensory Entrainment and Resonance and the ancient Indian
yogic techniques of breathing, sound resonance and other brain stimulation practices.
According to modern neuro-physiological understanding every psychology (or neuropsychology) has a distinct physiology in the brain [12]. Further, the interventions used
here are based on the latest technological discoveries coupled with the ancient and
traditional know-how. This, then, takes care of the possible requirement that neurophysiological learning must be a structural coupling of neuronal-psychical learning
and social-technological learning. In fact there are techniques that can produce almost
90%-95% brain activation and up to 100% brain wave synchronization. This
awareness of the relevance of such activities for design education cannot be claimed
to be new as it was practiced at Bauhaus as early as the 1919-20, but this does not
mean that the present approach is re-inventing the wheel. This paper mentions the
Bauhaus to really appreciate the vision and clarity that existed even then regarding
this kind of method for design education, and which seems to have been forgotten
now, and give due respect for the same but a careful observation will show that this
paper presents an approach that is more conscious and tangible, more repeatable and
measurable and is based on the latest findings of how brain learns and how it can be
made to learn. To quote Itten [15], “The training of the body as an instrument of the
mind is of great importance to a creative person. How can a hand express a
characteristic feeling in a line, when hand and arm are cramped? The fingers, the
hand, the arm, the whole body, can be prepared for the task by exercises of relaxation,
strengthening and sensitization. The body can be relaxed in three ways…. The third
way of relaxing, balancing, and harmonizing the body consists in the use of sound
vibrations. The students had to first practice sound production –they had to learn to
feel where the sounds vibrated in the body. The hummed note must be intense even if
its volume is low. A sound filled with the powers of the heart can work wonders.
Besides relaxation, breathing is of great importance. As we breathe, so we think and
conduct the rhythm of our daily routine. People who have achieved great success in
their lives always breathe quietly, slowly, and deeply. Those who are short of breath
are hasty and greedy in their thoughts and actions.” Obviously, the techniques used in
the present study are much more advanced and to a large extent validated by the latest
brain imaging equipment. Discussing the specifics of each method may be out of
context here.
Some examples and findings:
One tool often used for Design education, as also in management, is case studies.
While case studies are useful for convincing purpose, they are not very good for
generating experience that can build lasting neural connections. They are much like
the fairy tales -beginning with “Once upon a time…” and ending with lived happily
ever after or not with some tragedy in between. The student involvement and neural
learning is minimal. Often neither the presenter nor the presented are aware of all the
factors implicated for the outcome. Instead, new methods were devised like
simulation studies, experiential studies, sensibility studies, and perception labs. The
former two simulate the real situation with full understanding and manipulation
ability of all the variables associated with the end result, giving the students more
direct experience, and thereby stronger allied neural connectivity, of the situation in
quest. The latter two are useful for creating the necessary sensitization and
perceptibility regarding the topic pursued.
For example, as a part of perception lab, ten volunteers were recently taken to a deep
forest inhabited by nocturnally active wild animals like bears (70-80 were there in the
region) and spotted leopards (7-8 in number) and reptiles like the white and king
cobras. Nobody had seen the place before. They were taken to the place at night and
so the daytime view was not possible and the space seemed more dangerous. At
around midnight on a dark moonless sky, they were taken into the thick interiors near
a water body (increasing the chances of animal activity) and were each told to walk
up and back around 200 steps all alone, with a few stones as the only weaponry and
support. They were also taught specific techniques and perception theory. About 10
days (at the time of first draft) have passed since then and all the volunteers are being
closely monitored. Needless to say the impact was so powerful that they were
sensitized in just one night. What remains to be seen is how long this effect lasts and
whether a follow up is needed and, if so, of what kind. So far, this particular group
has been found to have become highly perceptive and their fine motor skills show
improvement. [About 50 days have passed (at the time of this writing) since then and
all the volunteers are still being closely monitored. Of the ten volunteers, six continue
to demonstrate the noticeably positive effects observed earlier and also show
continual improvement in terms of heightened sensitivity and seem to show increased
EQ. More tests are being conducted].
Using entrainment/resonance based techniques, brain activity alteration was reported
in as less as 15 days of daily practice in all the cases of another batch of 9 volunteers.
In three cases, full brain activity alteration was achieved in the same duration.
Definite brain structure activation in order to acquire a particular skill, like systems
thinking, visual imagination, etc. is also reported in all the cases that practiced the
specially given interventions regularly. Regularity of the practice has been found to be
very important for the intended modification to be accrued. Though not specifically
aimed for, one overwhelming development was observed as a result of certain
breathing exercises done in conjunction with sound resonance techniques. Normally,
if the hands are bent from the elbow and rotated in front of the chest, it will be
possible for anyone to rotate both of them in the same direction. But it is difficult to
simultaneously rotate both in the opposite directions. This could be learned with
practice but here this ability was achieved without any training for the same, and it
was possible to do the same not only with hands but with all left-right body parts –
shoulders, legs, fingers, toes, etc. The full connotation of this is being studied, but it
seems to suggest an ability to control the involuntary reflexes, meaning thereby
increased concentration ability and more full brain utilization and control over the
whole body and indicating an improved prefrontal cortex and basal ganglia activity.
It was found, through the questionnaire, that most (almost 90% of the sample)
designers had enlarged limbic activity. This explains the predominantly emotional
temperament and the characteristic drives and behaviour of most designers. This
explains why designers are more emotion led and therefore more hands driven than
the ‘mind’ oriented. Therefore, the mode of design education has to be relevantly
altered. Higher cortical activation along with the limbic activity can bring the desired
whole brain type of neural learning giving rise to a new breed called ‘strategic’
designers, as should be the case ideally, than the traditional predominantly right
brained, artistic ones. Among volunteers who practiced regularly, impulse control and
a reasonable degree of overpowering of the genetic, nature and nurture driven
predispositions has been evident. All groups, irrespective of the time duration of
intervention, report a distinct enhancement in multi-sensory imagination, spontaneous
creativity, intuition, awareness and presence of mind. Also, their overall increase in
design grasping, can be called ‘design intelligence’ (DQ), based on perked up
observation, sensation and perception, heightened sensitivity, etc., has been indicated.
Conclusions:
This paper discusses the neurophysiology of education and learning by drawing from
the various latest findings in the field and applying that to design education. It argues
that the Neurophysiologic model of design education seems to offer more tangible and
measurable mode of transference. The latest accomplishments in the field of
neurophysiology were discussed and how this knowledge can be used to alter the
neural connections to achieve the desired physiology required for a specific mastery.
And how that is relevant to design education and more importantly how this approach
could help in imparting awareness and learning that is more tangibly and measurably
transferred and hence is more uniform across all the students in terms of grasping and
retention and retrieval. This re-looking at the design education is especially important
as the demands of and on the designers are changing in today’s socio-economical
context. Further, through some experiments and empirical studies, the paper illustrates
that by developing new methods of delivery even the so called ‘mental’ skills can be
taught effectively and quantifiably. This paper was more of preliminary study and a
lot more emphatic evaluative research in the same with the help of functional brain
imaging support needs to be taken up. Welcome onboard.
References:
1.
Schrödinger, Erwin. (1992). What is Life? with Mind and Matter and Autobiographical
Sketches , 1, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
2. Watson, James. (2004). DNA: The Secret of Life, 34-5, 77, Arrow books, London
3. Dudai, Yadin. (2003). The Neurobiology of Memory: Concepts, Findings, Trends, 5-6, Oxford
University Press, USA
4. Mehta, Krishnesh. S. (2003). Designing for and with Senses and Sensibilities, 180, In
Proceedings of the 1st International Meeting of Science and Technology of Design: Senses and
Sensibility in Technology, IADE, Lisbon, Portugal
5. Roberts, Kevin. (2004). Lovemarks: the future beyond brands, Powerhouse books, NY, USA
6. Anderson, Donald. (1960). Elements of Design, 44-45, Holt, Rinehart & Winson, NY, USA
7. Schwartz, Evan. (2004). Juice: the creative fuel that drives world-class inventors, 81, Harvard
Business School Press, Boston, USA
8. Mehta, Krishnesh. S. (2003). Designing for and with Senses and Sensibilities, 179, In
Proceedings of the 1st International Meeting of Science and Technology of Design: Senses and
Sensibility in Technology, IADE, Lisbon, Portugal
9. Itten, Johannes. (1963, 1975). Design and Form: The Basic Course at the Bauhaus, 6, Thames
and Hudson, London, UK.
10. Itten, Johannes. (1963, 1975). Design and Form: The Basic Course at the Bauhaus, 8, Thames
and Hudson, London, UK.
11. Zaltman, Gerald. (2003). How Customers Think: Essential insights into the mind of the
market, Harvard Business School Press, USA
12. Amen, Daniel. (1998). Change your Brain Change your Life, Times Books, USA and Amen,
Daniel. (2002). Healing the Hardware of the Soul, The Free Press, USA
13. Zohar, Danah and Marshall, I. N. (2001). Spiritual Intelligence: the ultimate intelligence,
Bloomsbury, USA
14. Goleman, Daniel, Boyatzis, Richard, Mckee, Annie. (2002). The New Leaders: transforming
the art of leadership into the science of results, 44, Little, Brown, Time Warner Books, UK
15. Itten, Johannes. (1963, 1975). Design and Form: The Basic Course at the Bauhaus, 9, Thames
and Hudson, London, UK.
NB: Most of the Neurophysiologic concepts have been drawn and derived from references, 3, 12 and
13 and some of the material from the books mentioned in the bibliography.
Bibliography:






Calvert, Gemma, Spencer, Charles and Stein, Barry, eds, Handbook of Multi-sensory
Processes, Bradford Books, MIT Press, USA, 2004.
Carter, Rita, Mapping the Mind, Berkeley, CA, University of California Press, 1998.
Reader’s Digest, Making the Most of Your Brain, Duncan Baird Publishers, London, 2002.
Schacter, Daniel, How the Mind Forgets and Remembers: the seven sins of memory, Souvenir
Press Ltd., UK, 2003.
Schiffmann, Richard, Sensation and Perception: an integrated approach, Wiley, USA, 2001.
Spitza, Manfred, Mind within the net: models of learning, thinking and acting, Bradford
Books, MIT Press, USA, 1999.
Biographical Sketch:
Krishnesh Mehta has been working on the synergetic convergence of Design, Science and
Technology and Management for over a decade. He has done Masters in Physics followed by
an Advanced Diploma in Space Sciences. He is a chartered lighting engineer with
specialization in Reality SFX. He is certified in alternative therapies and medicines. He has
also done MBA and has been actively involved in researching on Senses and Sensibilities,
Perceiving Perception, and the Neurophysiology of Creativity, Leadership and Systems
thinking. He has also done extensive work on combining the best of the modern and the
ancient sciences like yoga for achieving desired alteration in the brain functioning. Based on
the above convergence he has developed the concept of Multi-sensory (48 plus sensors) and
Cross Sensory Design, Perceptual and Intuitive User Interfaces and has been holding regular
workshops on the same. He has been a member of the Faculty in the area of Design Science
and Strategic Design Management at the National Institute of Design, India, for the last 11
years. He has also been an active player in the setting up of the Country’s first Design
Business Incubator.
Contact Information:
Krishnesh Mehta
Design Science and Design Management,
Faculty of Industrial Design,
National Institute of Design,
Paldi, Ahmedabad – 380 007,
Gujarat, India.
E-mail: [email protected]