“We need a mission statement or a
value proposition that people can
hang their hats on.” Our survey
respondents and interviewees call
for some form of unity or consensus;
there is a desire for “a unified theo-
retical perspective” and “a common
curriculum.” Lack of consistency
and common structure in training/
courses causes anxiety and leads
to much hand wringing in course
selection. Concerns are expressed
about the lack of a “common valua-
tion of an HCI degree.”
Clearly, some courses are ranked
higher in terms of relevance of sub-
ject matter and quality of tuition
than others, as is the case for all
disciplines. However, the problem
is perceived to be more far-reaching
than the creation of a rank-ordered
list of courses would imply. For
many in our community (educa-
tors, practitioners, students, hiring
managers), a lack of consensus and
clarity about the value of a degree
in HCI is concerning for two related
reasons: First, a standardized cur-
riculum or degree would help stu-
dents select programs and inform
industry professionals about what to
expect from the students they hire,
and second, survey and interview
respondents realize that a more uni-
fied perspective would make it eas-
ier to advocate for the value of HCI
as a discipline, noting that “a com-
mon language seems to be lacking.”
In other words, there continues to
be fear that we have failed to clearly
state the value proposition of having
a strong education in HCI, despite
there being clear value associated
with the skill sets that students in
HCI develop. This is an ongoing con-
cern for HCI as a discipline, as has
been articulated by Shackel [ 4, 5] and
others since the field’s emergence.

While concern was expressed
about sending clear messages
regarding the value of HCI and
articulating the core perspectives
and topics represented within the
discipline, survey and interview
participants clearly indicated that
HCI is, and should be, essentially
multidisciplinary. As one survey
participant said, “I don’t think a uni-
fied theoretical perspective is pos-
sible or desirable.” HCI is an interdis-
ciplinary field, drawing on research
from psychology, computer science,
design, anthropology, information
science, and others. Therefore, it is
not surprising that many partici-
pants identify interdisciplinarity
as a key element in HCI education.
One usability manager writes, “It
is hard to learn the core skills in
one place or department.” A stu-
dent expresses a similar sentiment,
noting, “Interdisciplinarity is very
important, and not just from an ‘I’m
going to include someone else on my
project’ perspective...but it’s impor-
tant that our students be competent
in more than one area.” Many par-
ticipants point to the social sciences
as increasingly relevant fields. In
the words of one, “I don’t like saying
‘old HCI’ because it is all still cur-
rent and relevant and we don’t do it
right. But the set of interdisciplinary
domains that we’re drawing [from]
is much more restricted...and social
sciences can help.” A related chal-
lenge worth noting is the need “to
respect different epistemological
differences.”

March + April 2013