An Explanation of Word Choices.

Today I used a term which has caused some disturbance.

I said IED were "lumped" in with some other design courses. The other courses may of taken offence to this as they may of interpretated this to mean that I was referring to being grouped with lesser disciplines, or courses I personally deem academically beneath me.

This is far from the case.

I used this term to describe US being the ones dropped in a well established catagory. Like the fat kid at sports who doesn't suit any team. As in we don't fit in with anybody - leaving tutors humming and hawing as to where to file us in the cabinet. For those that think we believe we are "better" or deem ourselves to be more "precious" - it is a well known fact that those enterting the general course often have a portfolio of IED quality, however not all IED portfolios are suitable to enter the general course. So we are not better. Right from the start. It's not a question of being better, or equal, there is no segregation. We don't need a Martin Luther King martyr.

In terms of it being "just a catagory" yes it may be for most disciplines, however it is a deeper change for us given we are set to lose a direct entry in first year. This is not a bad thing, it's just going to be very difficult for the course structure to aclimitise to such a loss of specialised time. It's been like this since time began. The concern is by losing this year of specialism, where is the curriculum to be made up? We don't have a bernards watch. I know the argument "but we do fine with 3 years" will be brought up immediately, but that's because the other programmes have been developed with this in mind throughout, for us it's a huge change. It doesn't concern me personally as I am unaffected, I am merely concerned for IED as a course, as a whole, for everyone enterting at all stages.

So there is my explanation.

Perhaps this will clear up the misunderstanding, and unintentional hurt feelings.