Christina, I have a concern that you are being focused on 2 arenas that I am not, which may skew our perspectives slightly: 1) web/mobile; 2) startups. While the bulk of UX work today is in 1, it is not the only place by a lot, and definitely not limited to startups at all.
Something that makes creating a program in "interaction design" so difficult is that it has to work for everyone, which it invariably can't. This is why the most successful programs (IMHO) are the ones like ITP, RCA and CIID which could care less about Web/mobile, or any other (here & now) concerns and teach thinking, process and methods that transcend media and contexts. The graduates of these and similar programs seem to succeed in multiple contexts.
After my teaching experience, where I had to teach people who wanted to work at start-ups, were founders and people who wanted to work at consultancies and big companies. I agree that focusing on the core skills is the answer, but the students didn't always see it that way. ;)
Many were annoyed I wouldn't teach Axure, or Omnigraffle (my TA Eric was kind enough to give some workshops on it.). Some bagged on the portfolio review, seeing no use for it. It really is a challenge.
I suppose in my ideal world, teaching of theory would include an overview of what each practice might look like in different design areas (web, industrial, etc). And students could follow up with a specialized practicum or internship according to their interests. (Which, admittedly, also assumes a school with such broad and balanced connections.)
Thanks for your feedback! Team Branch
