Appalachian State University offers an incredibly limited amount of space for design students - between 40 to 50 students being accepted per year - so the research sample was rather limited. Despite this, several similarities between students were found, and a common methodology the graphic design student surfaced. For the purposes of this paper, 3 students, who will be referred to as Student A, Student B, and Student C due to a desire to rename unnamed in this paper, were chosen as representative samples from the group, due to their differing approaches and outlooks on completing graphic design assignments with text requirements. Student A seemed to follow the methodology described by professionals in the discourse rather closely, working methodically to building up a cohesive work that portrayed the theme/message that they intended, and putting a good deal of thought into the word choice. Juxtaposing this greatly were Student B and Student C, who both described their process as “going with the flow”; their work system was described as being generally unfocused and laid back. However, while Student B already had an entire idea in mind that they were laid back in completing and refining, Student C only had concepts and themes in mind. Their processes affected both students’ use of texts, as with their laid back mindsets and actions in place, their word choice came off as somewhat thoughtless - While the words did fit the topics at hand, they typically used weaker vocabulary to convey their messages, lacking rhetoric appeal to the audience. There is, however, one uniting factor between all 3 students; all 3 students stated in their interviews that the concept was the most important factor in how they chose the words used in their works. They all, also,
Appalachian State University offers an incredibly limited amount of space for design students - between 40 to 50 students being accepted per year - so the research sample was rather limited. Despite this, several similarities between students were found, and a common methodology the graphic design student surfaced. For the purposes of this paper, 3 students, who will be referred to as Student A, Student B, and Student C due to a desire to rename unnamed in this paper, were chosen as representative samples from the group, due to their differing approaches and outlooks on completing graphic design assignments with text requirements. Student A seemed to follow the methodology described by professionals in the discourse rather closely, working methodically to building up a cohesive work that portrayed the theme/message that they intended, and putting a good deal of thought into the word choice. Juxtaposing this greatly were Student B and Student C, who both described their process as “going with the flow”; their work system was described as being generally unfocused and laid back. However, while Student B already had an entire idea in mind that they were laid back in completing and refining, Student C only had concepts and themes in mind. Their processes affected both students’ use of texts, as with their laid back mindsets and actions in place, their word choice came off as somewhat thoughtless - While the words did fit the topics at hand, they typically used weaker vocabulary to convey their messages, lacking rhetoric appeal to the audience. There is, however, one uniting factor between all 3 students; all 3 students stated in their interviews that the concept was the most important factor in how they chose the words used in their works. They all, also,