 I'll just add to that maybe that I've been teaching at Pratt for about 16 years and about 13 of them with some form of the word typography in the name of my classes. I'm here to share some of my experiences in delicate art of removing typography from a curriculum or as it might be set in the post-apocalyptic hellscape that some faculty seem to be imagining. Just to give the presentation some context, their revised curriculum I'll be referencing while being explored for years previously I was mostly determined and started rolling out during a four-year period where I was a part-time assistant chair under Kathleen Creighton, acting chair, lateral to myself, and associate chair under current chair Jessica Wexler. And I should underscore at the beginning that this is a work in progress. We're preparing for year two of the rollout which means that the new junior courses are basically rolling out in about four weeks. So there won't be a bullet pointed what if we learn slide at the end but I suspect the telling of the story so far will shed some light like parents said earlier. It's the things that we're trying. So first some quick facts. Our department has a student sophomore through senior year. We have a Bauhaus-based foundation year and grad comedy as a separate department. We have scale of approximately 120 sophomores increasing to around 200 as graduating class through transfers in theater schools, three concentrations, not majors. For years we have emphasized the convergence of disciplines, the commonalities over the differences. There's some numbers on faculty and staff that speak for themselves. And it's largely the same core curriculum since the 1960s, motion interactivity. We're integrated somewhat over time but along with professional practice in most students cases we're brought in through electives. For the sake of time, I won't go into the reasoning of the pro aside but these are the parameters that we had to work with. It's a staggered rollout so that one cohort as they move through each year will experience the new classes. Most importantly, BFA has moved from 134 to 126 credits and with very few exceptions they moved to three credit courses four and a half hours long. So here's what our curriculum task force and a subsequent departmental curriculum committee both of which I was on did. Don't be too scared. See how much we can read that. So here in one place is where we were and where we're going just in terms of the courses within the department for each concentration. The red are the courses that are shared by all concentrations which then split up as they move through the curriculum. Our mantra was the same but better because hence the fact that we say legacy of above and revised down below as opposed to new and old. As you can see from the red we'll be keeping students from different concentrations and shared courses for a longer period of time and still promoting that convergence that I mentioned. Assuming you can follow and read this you may be able to guess who got nervous when a certain word stopped showing up in the course titles. It was the illustrators. It's always the illustrators and I'm not really blaming them. I'm actually just showing this to suggest that whenever change happens people are going to be frustrated. But right behind the illustrators were the typographers or at least the graphic designers who loved typography. So there's the graphic design arc. A little bit clearer. So one of the framers of this I always saw the typographic arc of typography one through four in the legacy curriculum mirrored in research analysis and process. Bottom there, type in information design and then the two integrated viscums cross-platform and new forms. Context and research, hierarchy and structure then multi-page, multi-platform systems and then experimentation and exploration. But by now you're aware of our mistake. Here are the courses that actually have the word typography in their title. And that's of course what people focus on. Where did the type go they cried? Now we have to teach type end information design, they asked. Our students will be laughed out of the industry. Underlying much of this of course there's a subtext of Michael, you're a type guy, which is true. But when you are a type guy you see the possibilities everywhere. In fact our mistake was probably keeping the word in there at all. We hadn't removed typography. We had minimized it and in people's eyes that probably hurt more. We probably should have called it content and data or something or maybe warp and weft. Or we could have changed the name of all the courses to include typography. Because it should come as no surprise to everyone here that for example a course called research analysis and process should talk about historical context of typography and think about audience and appropriateness of type face choice, touch upon terminology, some limited classification. Again probably some of that connotative de-initiatives that Perrin mentioned earlier. We're talking about cross-platform design. How are you not going to discuss the benefits and the challenges of screen-based type? But we can't put typography in all of the names any more than we can put illustration in all of them. So instead we have to plan ahead, have meetings and conversations and stay diligent about what's actually being put into those courses on a daily basis. And at some point like our students we have to learn by doing. So let's talk about some of what I've done. Last spring we rolled out typography and information design for our sophomores and I realized that all the things I said before meant nothing if I couldn't implement it after about a decade of teaching typography one and two to these students. Through discussions with others I made some decisions of things to keep and things to drop. For the record I kept lucked in, I dropped ringhurst and I apologized for that. I still gave a mid-term and a final but I geared those towards larger concepts instead of minutia which I recognize are our typographic bread and butter. It's easy if we focus on the rules but it's also really easy for the students especially in a mixture of concentrations to be dismissive of that. I actually had a suspicious number of students about a third of the way through the semester say this class is about the fussy details. And I would stop whatever they were doing to underscore that there were indeed typographic devils and gods in the details but I was more interested in how they looked at large organizational and structural issues. So we had more than a couple of discussions about wire frames and about sketching, book mapping. We spent a third of a class folding paper discussing different ways the content could be revealed inside of a brochure. And in a semester long quest to make sure that self-defined illustration students understood the universality of this I even created a book map for where the wild things are. I'm showing how pacing and placement of type in relation to illustrations on the page is still a very conscious decision. But while I wanted to make sure that these are the concepts that stuck with them I did bear in mind that you have to at least walk before you run. And I've been running with a certain kind of type for some time myself. Here's some work from legacy courses type one and two. And it's work that I'm sure you've all seen before. Black and white only please. No shapes or images. Limited number of type faces. It's the transition solidly from type one to two. They're pretty indicative of what was going on during our sophomore year. This one I just enjoy showing because it's a collaborative project with each student interpreting a lyric from a song and then combining them into one book. And probably cause I'm still mourning David Bowie. So with project one I worked from something I knew beginning with the selection of words that they quote unquote illustrated with type and then turned into posters for an event or a cause. I had already opened up the possibilities a few years back for hand-done type. More illustrative approach. And so carried that into the revised course. And I think we hit a similar place in four weeks. You can see on the right in TID versus 12 for type one on the left. Or that's for those counting 18 in class hours versus 36. Of course that's only if we focus on courses of typography in the title. And I certainly recognize and understand that these students got something from their first semester courses and we all benefited from it. On the right there you maybe start to see some more of that typographic hellscape we're all concerned about despite its expressive strengths if you're not. Here's that same student the same week. As so many had noted we now had to teach type and information design. So even as they developed illustrative type I introduced my students to Susan Care, Odleisha and Isotype, compared icon sets to typefaces and have them create pixel and vector based icon sets. And then pictograms which are then turned into posters. And you can see how the typing imagery are starting to work together in an instructive type level on the right there. Here are a couple of more in that retro vein. Project two was a semi-collaboration, design theme publication, two issues, two teams, students research designers that they chose themselves, wrote essays on them and conducted surveys about name and work recognition. Students working on the same issue shared a grid and layouts for their designer essays and then each design discrete front matter, back matter including infographics and covers of their own. So everyone had a book that was both theirs and everyone else's. Don't worry if you didn't follow that, took them a long time to you and I tend to write assignments like stereo instructions. The point of the writing and the research is naturally to create a through line with that research analysis and process class that I mentioned in the same way that I expect other courses to create a through line with typography. So this is one student's work and let's say this is an A. Here's a collection of others showing how students address some of the front and back matter, some of the infographics, some braced illustration more as they were on the right, some were non-traditional. I'll note there was a bit of whiplash when we got to this project after the other ones where they said, you mean we get to use color, we get to use any type faces we want and then they kind of ran from the room before I could change my mind. For the third project, I'll just let Pam here explain it. As part of our final review, she showed the process pretty clearly. It's a multi-day event, identity of visual research, sketching, including wireframes and icon sets, application of icons to a map, integration of map into typographic look and feel, promotional brochure with schedule and a couple of site pages. He's already establishing a sophomore level branding and multi-platform experiences with type, pretty much just what I was looking for with the possible accession, exception that she maybe could have presented to reveal the brochure a little bit better in her presentation. This probably does it more justice. Now for comparison, here's some of the final work from when I taught type three, junior level course, to which I think the TID work compares pretty favorably. Despite the fact that TID students are in theory, 67 and a half hours, for those of you doing the math, of in-class typography in the name instruction behind what the legacy students had for half as much. For my section anyway, we wound up with students in quote unquote one semester of type, arriving at the same point as three semesters in terms of typographic branding and structure and marginally behind in terms of details, which I believe will come. Think of that in terms of concentrations I mentioned for a moment. The Emily, that first point magazine, the A that I pointed out, is an illustration concentration. And admittedly, she's an exceptional one who also embodies what undergrad comedy has traditionally pride ourselves in calling a communications design major. But if we can have those illustration students rivaling the type three work of graphic design students in the legacy curriculum, and then being exposed to more type in their junior year courses, we'll be in some kind of business. So a moment ago, I said for my section anyway, there were 10 of us meeting and comparing notes before, during and after the semester to see how the rollout was going, discuss what I need to shift forward, backward, laterally, what might end up in research now, some process. So I just asked Daisuke Endo, who was also smart enough to discuss typographic context with his research students to share with me some of the strong work from his TID section. Not going to say there aren't some equally unsuccessful examples, as there always are, but I think across the sections, everyone up their game and made grading a little bit harder. So that's a class that's rolled out anyway and one that still perhaps wrong-headedly still has typography and it's title. So now I'd like to talk about some of the preparation for what I see in front of us with the junior year. Earlier I mentioned the arc of type one through four with four being where experimentation or exploration can happen, expecting that to carry over to the new forms course in the junior year. While implementing type and information in spring, I looked at how my last semester of teaching type four to juniors could prep for the new junior level course that I expected to teach. So here are some legacy type four projects from previous semesters where I pushed the students to explore more. On the left is a piece from a how-to project that the students had to submit via snail mail in the process creating an experience and promoting interaction. That's a package that explains how to make Apple Pie complete with the type embedded in the rolling pin. It also assigned over the past five years or so a pass fail project prompting students to do anything they want to relate it to typography using complex books like Pale Fire, Ulysses, Moby Dick. Do something you pass. Don't do something you fail. Inevitably, they took this as a challenge as seen in that hanging plexiglass installation and the type case where each letter transforms the letter that precedes it from Pale Fire. No one did just a postcard or something like that. This last one is a program that a student coded to create iterative typographic posters at the push of a button. So looking at all these explorations, materials and dimensionality, I realized something. I thought that new forms class, who am I kidding, I actually want to explore product environment and materials. And what better place to explore than in a library? Here's ours. It's built in 1896 with interiors by Tiffany Glass in decorating. It's one of the jewels of Pratt's Brooklyn campus. I've been having casual what if conversations with the director for years about doing something with those interiors. So following the model of that pass fail project in type four and looking to product environment materials, I proposed each student that's about, sorry, each student that's about 27 out of two sections, creating some kind of library themed messaging within that environment. So here's some of that environment. As Russ, the director gives each section a tour, discusses themes related to libraries, breaking barriers, activating space, hidden treasures. I wanted to underscore research analysis and process again, integrating the promise of the revised curriculum to the legacy students. They did some of their own digging, came to class ready to discuss themes and how we might build a shared exhibit around them. For the record, the two themes they came up with were transforming community and reticulation. You can look that up. He also came to class for guest crits with Chris Arabajas, who is the director of multimedia services, who deserves a shout out for all the tremendous help he did in installation. The students made things. They tested them in the space and they installed them over a week or so. There were products in there, including interactive experiences. There were certainly some environments as they projected on and installed within the space and exploration with materials, including acrylic and plastic tubing. So I spent more time than I was maybe comfortable with on tall ladders. That's okay. There was AR work, VR work, social media, animations, but I'm just going to highlight a couple of the more tactile ones since I'm talking about product environment materials. Lee here created acrylic words that came from a survey of shared qualities, appreciated by Pratt students, and installed them with a multicolor LED projection so that viewers could create their own typographic light compositions. Julia, who hit the ground running, really wanted to use anamorphic typography to explore how the library worked to activate space, for those who used it. Carlisle utilized those Tiffany glass floors, creating the start of a wayfinding system built around tiling. I'm particularly a fan of what a presence they were from below that's really thinking about the environment itself through the glass floors. Lauren mounted a set of alphabetical letterforms created out of plastic tubing, using the bundling and connections to suggest community and the transforming community class. The library dubbed this the cold collector or something like that, a conductor, because everyone sick or healthy would run their hands along the texture of the surface. I kept trying to get her to refer to it as the elevator because of its location and she refused. But we did adopt the term Ligatube to describe the letterform connections, so score one for plenty humor and typographic anatomy. Bridget created a typeface from tree carvings and used it on dust covers for books related to sustainability in one of the stacks library. Her mother even helped in the installation, that's her in the lower right corner. Extra credit for that. And of course, since these were exhibits though, this was still type four, they needed catalogs for us to display in the library. These would not be pass-fail like the installations were and each student would need to feature all of their classmates' work, creating a new design that factored in the name of the show without just rehashing what they had done for their installation. So these are some more products and you can tell they're products because they're sitting on shelves. And one of those rewarding moments of pedagogy, I sat at each section down when they came in with initial lackluster ideas and expected designs for the catalogs and pointed out how we had just in the pass-fail world worked with scale and scope and light and glass. And I said, see, the reason we did that was you could understand how to apply that to something like a catalog as opposed to dealing just what you would expect in the past. So Lulu here went all in with an acrylic cover, laser cut short pages and layered type. Transparency was actually a big hit with a few students, but it also brought with it explorations of scale and letter forms that were miles away from those first designs. And that can be plenty to create a successful product. These are just some more of the other covers that came out of it. So I said, maybe promised at the beginning that there would be no final bulletin page so I think I can probably end it there. And the presentation, the rollout of course keeps on going. I don't have a closing point about just what one needs in order to roll out something like this. Maybe it's an open mind, same open as the discussion, the sharing and exploration of knowledge that first led us to teach all that exploration. I recognize that I had a distinct advantage over other instructors because my roles in refining the curriculum, which allowed me to focus on each course's context within the larger scheme. As such, I picked up quite a bit through the entire process and forced myself to look even more closely at why and how I teach. So I thought it's only right to share. I referenced most of these people earlier, so thank you again and thank all of you and a special thank you to whoever caught the typo in my abstract and fixed it because it would be really weird to stand up here and talk about removing typography from the curriculum and having a typo in your abstract. Thank you.