In the time of upheaval and crisis, what is the point of design education? In nearly every school of architecture or design there is a central, unspoken rejoinder to this question: the point of design education is to condition each successive generation of students for a lifetime of exploited labor that is detached from any critical relationship to the role that designers play in aestheticizing and instrumentalizing global capitalism. While there are always spaces of exception in the academy—the long tradition of community-engaged studios (e.g., Auburn’s Rural Studio and a number of design-build studios elsewhere)—most efforts tend to reproduce the long hours and infinite production that underpins so much of design education. This goal is not written in mission statements or strategic plans—to do so would threaten the machinery of student recruitment and major gift fundraising. But it is there, plain to see, in the tendency of design institutions to reproduce their most common traits: valorizing individuality and competition, endless work and infinite production, and service to the elites that fund much of the field’s work. Put another way, design education exists to reproduce the social and racial order of capitalism. And the core of its pedagogy is rooted in the studio.

在动荡和危机时期，设计教育的意义何在？几乎在每所建筑或设计学院，对这个问题都有一个核心的、不言而喻的反驳：设计教育的重点是让每一代学生终生从事被剥削的劳动，这种劳动与设计师所扮演的角色的任何关键关系无关。在审美化和工具化全球资本主义方面发挥作用。虽然学院里总有例外的空间——社区参与工作室的悠久传统（例如，奥本的乡村工作室和其他地方的许多设计建造工作室）——但大多数努力倾向于重现支撑这一点的长时间和无限的制作。大部分的设计教育。这个目标没有写在使命声明或战略计划中——这样做会威胁到学生招募和重大捐赠筹款的机制。但显而易见的是，设计机构倾向于复制其最常见的特征：重视个性和竞争，无休止的工作和无限的生产，以及为资助该领域大部分工作的精英服务。换句话说，设计教育的存在是为了再现资本主义的社会和种族秩序。其教学法的核心植根于工作室。设计教育的存在是为了再现资本主义的社会和种族秩序。其教学法的核心植根于工作室。设计教育的存在是为了再现资本主义的社会和种族秩序。其教学法的核心植根于工作室。