Overall, I did find the class informational and the content relevant to the history of graphic design. However, I do feel that the structure of these pseudo-lectures could be better arranged- I understand the time constraints though.

Each lecture was overloaded with so much content that we did not have time to delve into. I felt that this defeated the purpose of having art history classes. I am interested in certain aspects of graphic design history and was a bit disappointed that all we were able to learn was surface level reading.

For the reflections on OSS, I think there could be a more meaningful prompt to fulfil? Not that I necessarily want more work to do but if we can only brush the surface during lecture – it would be preferred if our after-class activity was geared towards self-research. Maybe having to answer short essay prompts or something.

The splitting of the quizzes into two is appreciated and the content was manageable for the limited time we had with the history of graphic design.

I do understand that there is really a lack of time to cover so much content so I don’t blame the tutor (I’m not sure if this is supposed to be like an open letter) for working within his constraints. Perhaps the main structure of History of Design needs to be revised.

Thank you for teaching this portion of History of Design! Lectures have nonetheless been interesting.