Interesting results
And comparison to the 2022 study

Timo Meynhardt

This contrasts with the respondents' assessment of what is actually taught in the degree program. "Social awareness" remains far behind in last place. What is remarkable compared to 2022 is that intercultural competence and social competence, as socially oriented skills, have plummeted in the rankings. The relative appreciation of aesthetic-creative, conceptual-design, and technical-executive skills may be due to a return to "classical" skills. The extent to which this actually represents a trend will become apparent in future surveys.

When asked to what extent design degree programs in Germany as a whole have public value and contribute to the common good with their educational offerings, a more positive perception emerges across all dimensions and across all respondent groups. The gap between expectations and reality is smaller across all dimensions in the 2024 survey. Across all four dimensions, there is a relative increase of 7%. The relative increase of 12% in the contribution to cohesion is particularly impressive. The basic pattern of a more positive view of teachers towards students remains. It is noteworthy that alumni have so far hardly noticed this change or have not noticed it. In the moral dimension, design degree programs are even attributed a lower contribution to the common good.

Due to the different participation rates, it is impossible to make direct comparisons between individual universities or degree programs. 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This study is a follow-up study. It builds on the first nationwide survey on public welfare orientation in design studies conducted in 2022. At that time, substantial trends became apparent, the persistence and changes of which were to be examined in a survey two years later. The initial survey served as a baseline assessment, while the follow-up survey was intended to locate these trends and highlight potential changes. 

The associated efforts are part of the ongoing search for answers to the social function and mission of design studies in the 21st century. They continue the discussion that began in 2021 with the publication of the White Paper "Designing Design Education."

The working hypothesis behind this is that design education must change as the social environment changes. The public value concept, with its scientific foundation, provides a solid starting point for analyzing, evaluating, and understanding this interaction.

Similar to the initial survey, a nationwide survey was conducted in cooperation with HHL Leipzig Graduate School of Management. Students, faculty, staff, and alumni from a total of 2024 design schools were able to participate between May and August 113. The analysis included responses from 484 individuals from 56 schools. The absolute participation rate was slightly higher than in 2022 (484 vs. 438), but fewer schools participated (56 vs. 70).

The desire to pay greater attention to the social impact (public value) of design in degree programs remains high (83,5% in 2024; 82% in 2022). The need for development remains high. At the same time, the public value of design studies in Germany has increased. With increases of over 10% in some individual public value dimensions, the degree programs have achieved significant improvements. The relative increase in the contribution of design to social cohesion (+12%) was particularly high.

The discrepancy between consistently high development needs and increased contributions to the common good need not be a contradiction. Thus, with greater reflection on the social significance of design, for example, its role in democracy (+17%) and civil society (+14%), demands and expectations may also have increased. For now, it remains to be seen whether these are direct effects of current developments or the fruits of previous efforts. No survey, no matter how sophisticated, will be able to determine this in detail. 

The increased emphasis on more traditional skills (aesthetic-creative, conceptual-design, and technical-executive skills) seems remarkable when considering what is actually taught in the program. Does this indicate a return to the basis of social impact?

It remains to be stated: Overall, the gap between the aspiration and reality of public value orientation in design studies in Germany has narrowed. However, to meet the continued high expectations for strengthening the public value concept, innovative approaches are needed that go beyond improvements to existing structures. If this can be achieved, there is an opportunity to make the public value paradigm an attractive guide for the further development of design studies. 

Not every trend is equally relevant for all participating universities and degree programs. Translating the results into one's own actions can only be achieved locally through dialogue with all stakeholders. Judging by the current survey, Pforzheim University of Applied Sciences, Ingolstadt University of Applied Sciences, and Berlin University of Applied Sciences are currently doing particularly well in this regard.

The first survey on the focus on the common good in design studies at German universities concluded: There's plenty of room for improvement! This is primarily because respondents had expressed a desire for a significant strengthening of the focus on the common good. Little has changed in this regard in 2024. Four out of five respondents continue to desire a more intensive discussion of the topic.

This does not necessarily contradict the consistently higher levels of public-welfare satisfaction with the degree programs. Indeed, as the social significance of design becomes more deeply reflected, so too may the demands and expectations.

The results presented describe the situation across all 56 participating universities. It is clear that individual trends are more or less pronounced in certain degree programs or universities. All participants are called upon to draw their own conclusions and engage in dialogue.

The current survey also demonstrates that a focus on the common good presents an opportunity for design studies. This longitudinal study, available for the first time, confirms the high relevance of the topic and provides initial indications of possible trends.

The current study shows that and how universities are making progress in their degree programs. The conclusion: There's movement!

Figure 014 clearly shows that faculty members rate the public value orientation of design programs higher than students and alumni. This applies to all five dimensions of the Public Value Scorecard adapted for design programs. A less consistent picture emerges for the newly introduced category "employees."

In general, the higher the score, the more emphasis is placed on teaching these values ​​during the course. Taken as a whole, they are an expression of the public value orientation. It is therefore important to strive for the most holistic approach possible for the program and to address the various value aspects in their interplay, but also in their potential for conflict. 

Please note: While the scorecard distinguishes five common good dimensions for design-specific consideration, these are condensed into four dimensions for a more general consideration to improve comparability with other organizations and areas of society.

Fig. 017-020 Comparison between the 2022 and 2024 survey results for students, alumni and teachers
(The group »Employees« was considered for the first time in 2024, which is why no comparison is possible here.)

DESIGN STUDY IN GERMANY
OVERVIEW AND ACCESS 2025

Universities with design courses
Distribution across the Federal Republic of Germany 2025

Click here for the course finder with all design courses in Germany

REFERENCES