Thanks to generative artificial intelligence, anyone with access to AI-powered platforms can generate images, posters, social media graphics, flyers, and more in seconds, reshaping the creative landscape and raising new questions about the future of digital media.
For decades, graphic designers have been at the forefront of visual storytelling, playing an essential role in shaping the brands and content we see every day. But what happens when the very skills that define their careers are threatened by rapidly advancing technology?
Danielle Currier, a professor of graphic design in the School of Visual & Performing Arts, is diving deeper into that question.
An early adopter of generative AI, Currier—who has worked as an educator, designer, and artist in the Boston area and New York City for over 30 years—approached the technology with curiosity, quickly developing a passion for exploring its potential and implications within the field of graphic design.
Since then, she has expanded her research and established herself as an active voice in conversations surrounding AI’s evolving role in the creative industry. In 2025, she was appointed chair of the University and College Designers Association (UCDA) AI Task Force, and has also shared her research and insights at numerous conferences across the country, contributing to broader discussions about the future of AI in design.
To explore the growing role of generative AI, we sat down with Currier to discuss how designers can effectively incorporate AI into their creative processes, why human creativity and expertise remain essential, and how she’s introducing these emerging technologies to students in the classroom.
Responses have been edited for clarity and length.
What first sparked your interest in generative AI, and how has your research evolved over the last three years?
Currier: Suddenly, there were these tools that could generate images from words, and as an artist and designer, I wanted to experiment with them and see what they could do. There was something really playful about being able to describe an idea and immediately see a visual interpretation of it.
But pretty quickly, that curiosity turned into something much bigger. It became clear that generative AI was going to have a significant impact on the creative industries and, consequently, on how we educate future designers. My questions shifted from, “What can I make with this?” to “What does this mean for artists and designers?”
Over the last three years, my research and presentations at industry conferences have increasingly focused on those larger questions: authorship, ethics, copyright, transparency, and how we preserve human creativity and judgment when AI becomes part of the creative process.
I’m still interested in experimenting and playing with the technology, but I’m much more interested now in how we can use it thoughtfully and responsibly without allowing it to replace the creative thinking that makes the work meaningful.
What does that process look like in practice?
Currier: For me, a lot of it comes down to being an active rather than a passive participant in the creative process. AI shouldn’t be something where you type in a simple prompt, accept what comes back, and call it finished. The artist or designer should still be actively brainstorming, making, experimenting, questioning, refining, and directing the work.
For graphic designers in particular, prompt engineering is incredibly important because you need to be able to art direct the AI. That requires visual literacy and design knowledge. You need to be very specific about what you want and why you want it, based on the communication goals you are trying to achieve.
In my classes, I give students an “art director” list of things they should be considering when developing prompts such as composition, typography, color, hierarchy, imagery, style, audience, point of view, lighting, and other aspects of the visual language. The more knowledge you have as a designer, the more specifically you can direct the output.
I also require students to submit their prompts with any AI-generated work. Transparency is vital. I want them to be able to answer three basic questions: Did you use AI? Why did you use it? How did you use it? That makes AI use part of the documented creative process rather than something that happens invisibly behind the final work.
How has the rise of generative AI influenced the way you teach your current classes at Endicott?
Currier: It really hasn’t changed the philosophy or strategy behind my teaching. I’ve always emphasized process and design thinking—the idea that strong design begins with research, understanding the problem, developing a creative strategy, and then determining the best way to communicate that visually.
What AI has changed are some of the tools we have available within that process. We can potentially spend less time on certain aspects of production and more time developing the creative strategy and perfecting how we implement that strategy through visual communication. It can also save a tremendous amount of time in research and gathering insights, which can help us make better-informed design decisions.
Of course, there are concerns as well. I worry about what could be lost in terms of creative collaboration. Creative work has traditionally involved people with different areas of expertise working together, and I don’t want students to lose an appreciation for that. My graphic design students work with photography students and collaborate with interior architecture students because learning how another creative professional thinks and what they can bring to an idea is an important part of becoming a designer.
Through your conference presentations, work on AI task forces, and conversations with designers and educators across the country, what are you hearing about where generative AI is headed in creative industries?
Currier: There has been a tremendous opportunity to learn from and share ideas with other educators who are facing many of the same challenges and opportunities that we are at Endicott. There’s actually some comfort in knowing that we’re all in this together. No one has all of the answers, and because the technology is changing so quickly, we’re continually learning from one another.
I also think it’s important to acknowledge that there is a great deal of hesitation, skepticism, and even outright dislike of generative AI among students, artists, and design professionals. And I think those feelings are valid. There are real concerns about how these systems are trained, whether artists’ work is being used without their consent or compensation, and questions surrounding copyright, ownership, and originality.
We’ve seen the design industry adapt to major technological changes before. How does the rise of AI compare, and what can designers learn from those previous shifts?
Currier: I see this as a huge opportunity, and I think my own experience is one of the reasons I’ve been an early adopter of AI. I’ve personally benefited from being introduced to an emerging technology at exactly the right point in my career.
When I was a senior in college, I had the opportunity to learn HTML and some development skills and create a website. At the time, those skills were still fairly new for graphic designers. I graduated with knowledge that many designers who had been working primarily in print for years didn’t yet have, and that helped launch my career. It made me very marketable at a moment when the profession was rapidly changing.
I see AI as a similar point in the evolution of design and technology. Our students have an opportunity right now to develop expertise in an area that is still emerging and changing very quickly. They can enter the profession not only knowing how to use these tools, but understanding how to use them strategically and creatively as designers.
What skills or mindset do you think today’s students need to develop to use AI effectively while still demonstrating their own value, creativity, and expertise?
Currier: Stay curious. Be willing to experiment with new tools and new ways of working, but also find what you love doing and make things with your heart and your mind.
Your perspective matters. Where you come from, what you’ve experienced, what you care about, and who you are all shape the way you see the world and the work you make. AI doesn’t have that lived experience—you do.
As these tools become more powerful and more accessible, I think that individual perspective becomes even more important. Learn how to use the technology, but don’t lose sight of what you uniquely bring to it. Your ideas, your imagination, your empathy, your curiosity, and your point of view are ultimately what give the work meaning.