Dispelling popular UX learning myths

Part 1 of 3 in “A not-so-easy, but cost-effective guide to becoming a UX professional”

Photo by Jens Lelie on Unsplash

Unfortunately, there is no easy replacement to the rigor of academic programs. The early stages of learning should be frequent, regular, and precise. While academia easily addresses all of these topics through daily coursework, access to professors, and an immediate community- it is hard to replicate properly in the real world.

When I first started in the field, I was tempted to commit to two initial routes for learning. I’ll cover the common dilemmas associated with these, and why they may not be the best choice in the long run.

Online Articles on Medium, LinkedIn, etc

Many new UX designers I have interacted with (including myself when I started) often attempt to learn the field periodically by reading online articles. This isn’t a bad habit by all means, but articles alone in a vacuum are not a substitute to foundational UX knowledge.

1. While these online articles are great resources for thought and discussion, most of them do not meet the same rigorous critique and review that academic text is exposed to. As a result, these articles can often serve more as forums for thought or postulation as opposed to industry standard guidelines.
2. Articles lack the full context needed for beginners to become skillful, not just guidelines based. Articles, in their independently written nature, often promise mastery of design skill through microcosm studies. For example, here’s an article I pulled up on Gestalt principles. Despite being a great summary on Gestalt principles, new practitioners reading it may come under the false impression that they have really become “master manipulators of Visual Communication.” Compare this to Jeff Johnson’s book “Designing with the Mind in Mind” which is described by Johnson himself as a “brief background” in understanding cognitive psychology in HCI. Gestalt Principles constitute just one chapter of fourteen. Despite the significantly larger breadth of information, Johnson still considers this more of an introduction than a capstone of mastery.

Articles, given their length, cannot efficiently substitute academic text for foundational learning. One article on Gestalt principles may reasonably substitute one or two chapters of an HCI book, but it will not give the same level of context that an intentionally structured and organized piece of academia can provide.

Bottom line: Most online articles, in their abbreviated and independent nature, are not substitutes to foundational learning.

X-Week Program/Bootcamp Courses

Programs like General Assembly are excellent at providing an introduction to UX design along with practical work to engage in. However, there are two things to keep in mind.

1. It’s expensive. Bootcamps like General Assembly can cost from $750 (short online courses) to $14,500 (full bootcamps).
2. It’s not a magic pill. Bootcamps are designed for introductory learning, not mastery. You will not come out of a ten week bootcamp as an expert. Like anything else in life, true development and sustainability of skill is a long-term game. As quoted by John Wooden, “Don’t look for the quick, big improvement. Seek the small improvement one day at a time. That’s the only way it happens — and when it happens, it lasts.”

Bottom line: X-Week program/bootcamp courses are pricy and are meant to serve as an introduction. They are not a magic pill to becoming a UX professional.

Next: “The benefits of academic UX reading, and how to commit to it”
Previously: “Foreward: A not-so-easy, but cost-effective guide to becoming a UX professional”