AIGA is playing a major role exploring the changing face of design education. In one article written by Jon Kolko, which highlights points made by Shelly Evenson at the New Context/New Practices educators conferences, Jon puts forth several changing dynamics of design education. Among the listed changing criteria, is specializing in one area. In the case of a designer it may be that we specialize on typography. This is in response to the pace that design is changing today. Rapidly. The idea is to focus on the traditional yet specialized. The article discusses the use of foundation courses as early entries into the design field. In contrast to this, the article offers that perhaps the early years should focus on typography, color and composition.
This is a consideration that would free up the students to get into the core of design, sooner. However many schools which perhaps are finding their foundation arts programs dwindling, might lose even further ground.
In the example given they layout the industrial designer with a greater understanding of anatomy, anthropometric and human factors. This may be at the expense of CAD training yet it also seems that the designer would be more effective having this grasp on human physicality.
Similarly the designer who spent a year studying typography would find themselves using 2D concepts to work out a design. As time progressed in the program the student would have a working ability to create as well as communicate on a variety of typographic levels.
Animators would do better with anatomy as well as life drawing. Yet does the multi media designer need the same courses? These are all areas that need to be evaluated as the face of design changes.
http://www.aiga.org/new-practices-six-perspectives-on-design-education/#changing_conditions